TERTttJM 

ORGANUM 


A-KEY'TOTHE 
ENIGMA5-OF 

THEWORLD 


PDOlWPENfKY 


THE  LIBRARY- 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 

IN  MEMORY  OF 
EDWIN  CORLE 

PRESENTED  BY 
JEAN  CORLE 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 


;  f  ,  их**  "D 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

(THE  THIRD  ORGAN  OF  THOUGHT) 

A  Key  to  the  Enigmas  of  the  World 


P.  D.  OUSPENSKY 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  RUSSIAN 
BY  NICHOLAS  BESSARABOFF  AND 
CLAUDE  BRAGDON  —  WITH  AN 
INTRODUCTION  BY  CLAUDE  BRAGDON 


The  Mystery  of  Space  and  Time.  Shadows 
and  Reality.  Occultism  and  Love.  Animated 
Nature.  Voices  of  the  Stones.  Mathematics 
of  the  Infinite.  The  Logic  of  Ecstasy. 
Mystical  Theosophy.  Cosmic  Consciousness. 
The  New  Morality.    Birth  of  the  Superman. 


MANAS  PRESS,  ROCHESTER,  N.Y.  1920 


COPYRIGHT,  1920  BY  THE 

MANAS  PRESS 

Copyrighted  in  Great  Britain 
and  Colonies 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  ENGLISH  TRANSLATION 

In  the  spring  of  1918,  a  young  Russian,  Nicholas  Bessaraboff, 
appeared  at  my  door  bearing  in  his  hand  Tertium  Organum,  a 
precious  gift  to  the  mind  and  to  the  spirit,  but  shrouded  in  the 
seven-fold  veil  of  the  to  me  incomprehensible  Russian  tongue. 
With  ardent  enthusiasm  and  admirable  patience  the  young  man 
outlined  to  me  the  nature  and  content  of  the  book.  I  took  fire  at 
once,  for  I  saw  that  the  author,  Ouspensky,  was  the  Columbus  of 
that  uncharted  ocean  of  thought  in  which  I  and  others  had  indeed 
adventured,  haunted  by  dreams  of  rich  argosies  from  virgin  con- 
tinents. 

Some  authors  gain  only  readers:  others,  more  fortunate,  win 
disciples,  and  Ouspensky  is  of  this  latter  class.  Bessaraboff  was  a 
disciple,  and  I  found  that  I  had  become  one  without  knowing  it. 
So  in  a  spirit  of  true  discipleship  we  set  to  work  to  make  Tertium 
Organum  known  to  the  English  speaking  world.  The  method  we 
adopted  was  for  him  to  make  a  somewhat  rigidly  literal  transla- 
tion, into  which  I  then  infused  only  so  much  of  literary  form  as 
seemed  necessary  for  lucidity  and  ease.  Faithfulness  to  the  orig- 
inal was  the  aim  held  piously  by  both  of  us  from  beginning  to  end. 

The  reader  has  the  right  to  know  something  of  our  fitness  for 
this  service.  For  my  own  less  arduous  and  important  part  in  the 
translation,  I  can  only  say  that  Ouspensky 's  thought  is  so  curious- 
ly parallel  to  the  movement  of  my  own  mind  as  expressed  in  Four 
Dimensional  Vistas,  that  I  could  be  accused  of  plagarism  by  any- 
one unaware  of  the  fact  that  my  book  was  published  before  I  had 
read  his. 

Mr.  Bessaraboff  studied  mechanical  engineering  at  the  Petro- 
grad  Polytechnic  Institute,  whose  student  body  is  composed  of  the 
honor  men  from  various  Russian  schools.  While  a  student,  his 
absorption  in  mathematics  and  mechanics  had  been  complete,  but 
the  reading  of  Tertium  Organum  so  awakened  his  interest  in  gener- 
al science,  philosophy  and  mysticism  that  he  embarked  upon  a 
collateral  course  of  study  that  made  him  familiar  with  practically 
every  phase  of  thought,  in  its  broad  outlines,  dealt  with  by  Ous- 
pensky in  his  book.  His  knowledge  of  English,  though  it  does  not 
extend  to  all  the  niceties  of  construction  and  literary  expression, 


20374  94 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

is  sufficient  for  him  to  read  the  language  with  perfect  understand- 
ing, and  to  express  himself  with  great  precision;  while  his  vocabu- 
lary, as  so  often  is  the  case  with  foreigners  who  have  learned  Eng- 
lish out  of  books,  is  larger  than  that  of  the  average  American  uni- 
versity graduate. 

As  for  Ouspensky  himself  he  is  an  accomplished  mathematician, 
magister  of  pure  mathematics,  and  he  holds  the  position  of  in- 
structor of  mathematics  in  the  Petrograd  Institute  of  Engineers  of 
Ways  of  Communication,  one  of  the  oldest  of  the  Russian  techni- 
cal schools.  He  is  by  now  thirty-eight  years  old,  has  travelled  ex- 
tensively, visiting  England,  Italy,  Egypt  and  India;  he  has  con- 
tributed to  mathematical  text-books,  and  is  the  author  of  several 
works  other  than  Tertium  Organum.  This  latter  is  now  in  its  sec- 
ond edition  in  Russia.  The  present  translation  was  made  from 
this  second  edition,  the  date  on  the  title  page  being  1916. 


In  naming  his  book  "Tertium  Organum"  Ouspensky  reveals  at  a 
stroke  that  astounding  audacity  which  characterizes  his  thought 
throughout — an  audacity  which  we  are  accustomed  to  associate 
with  the  Russian  mind  in  all  its  phases.  Such  a  title  says,  in 
effect:  "Here  is  a  book  which  will  reorganize  all  knowledge.  The 
Organon  of  Aristotle  formulated  the  laws  under  which  the  subject 
thinks;  the  Novum  Organum  of  Bacon,  the  laws  under  which  the 
object  may  be  known.  Behold!  I  give  you  a  Third  Organ  which 
shall  guide  and  govern  human  thought  henceforth." 

How  passing  strange,  in  this  era  of  negative  thinking,  of  timid 
philosophizing,  does  such  a  challenge  sound.  And  yet  it  has  the 
echo  in  it  of  something  heard  before, — what  but  the  title  of  an- 
other volume,  Hinton's  A  New  Era  of  Thought. 

Ouspensky's  Tertium  Organum,  and  Hinton's  A  New  Era  of 
Thought  present  substantially  the  same  philosophy  (though  Hin- 
ton's book  only  sketchily),  arrived  at  by  the  same  route — mathe- 
matics. 

Here  is  food  for  thought.  In  the  words  of  Philip  Henry  Wynne, 
"Mathematics  possesses  the  most  potent  and  perfect  symbolism 
the  intellect  knows;  and  this  symbolism  has  offered  for  genera- 
tions certain  concepts  (of  which  hyper-dimensionality  is  only  one) 
whose  naming  and  envisagement  by  the  human  intellect  is  per- 
haps its  loftiest  achievement.    Mathematics  presents  the  highest 


INTRODUCTION 


certitudes  known  to  the  intellect,  and  is  becoming  more  and  more 
the  final  arbiter  and  interpreter  in  physics,  chemistry  and  astron- 
omy. Like  Aaron's  rod  it  threatens  to  swallow  all  other  know- 
ledges as  fast  as  they  assume  organized  form.  Mathematics  has 
already  taken  possession  of  great  provinces  of  logic  and  psychol- 
ogy,— will  it  embrace  ethics,  religion  and  philosophy?" 

In  Tertium  Organum  mathematics  enters  and  pervades  the 
field  of  philosophy;  but  so  adroitly,  so  silently  as  it  were,  that  one 
hardly  knows  that  it  is  "there."  It  dwells  more  in  Ouspensky's 
method  than  in  his  matter,  because  for  the  most  part  the  math- 
ematical ideas  necessary  for  an  understanding  of  his  thesis  are 
such  as  any  intelligent  high  school  student  can  comprehend.  The 
author  puts  to  himself  and  to  the  reader  certain  questions,  pro- 
pounds certain  problems,  which  have  baffled  the  human  mind  for 
thousands  of  years — the  problems  of  space,  time,  motion,  causal- 
ity, of  free  will  and  determination — and  he  deals  with  them  ac- 
cording to  the  mathematical  method :  that  is  all.  He  has  sensed 
the  truth  that  the  problem  of  mathematics  is  the  problem  of  the 
world  order,  and  as  such  must  deal  with  every  aspect  of  human  life. 

Mathematics  is  a  terrible  word  to  those  whose  taste  and  train- 
ing have  led  them  into  other  fields,  so  lest  the  non-mathematical 
reader  should  be  turned  back  at  the  very  threshold,  deciding  too 
hastily  that  the  book  is  not  for  him,  let  me  dwell  rather  on  its 
richly  humanistic  aspect. 

To  such  as  ask  no  "key  to  the  enigmas  of  the  world,"  but  only 
some  light  to  live  by,  some  mitigation  of  the  daily  grind,  some 
glimpse  of  some  more  enlightened  polity  than  that  which  rules  the 
world  today,  this  book  should  have  an  appeal.  The  author  has 
thrown  overboard  all  the  jargon  of  all  the  schools;  he  uses  the 
language  of  common  sense,  and  of  every  day;  his  illustrations  and 
figures  of  speech  are  homely,  taken  from  the  life  of  every  day.  He 
simply  says  to  the  reader,  "Come  let  us  reason  together,"  and 
leads  him  away  from  the  haunted  jungle  of  philosophical  systems 
and  metaphysical  theories,  out  into  the  light  of  day,  there  to  con- 
template and  to  endeavor  to  understand  those  primal  mysteries 
which  puzzle  the  mind  of  a  child  or  of  a  savage  no  less  than  that 
of  the  sophisticated  and  super-subtle  ponderer  on  the  enigmas  of 
the  world.  Not  that  Ouspensky  is  a  trafficker  in  the  obvious — far 
from  it:  those  who  know  most,  think  most,  feel  most,  will  get  most 
out  of  his  book — but  a  great  sanity  pervades  his  pages,  and  he 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 


never  leads  away  into  labyrinths  where  guide  and  follower  alike 
lose  their  way  and  fail  to  come  to  any  end. 


Leaving  the  average  reader  out  of  account  for  the  moment, 
there  are  certain  others  whom  the  book  should  particularly  inter- 
est— if  only  in  the  way  of  repulsion. 

First  of  all  come  the  mathematicians  and  the  theoretical  phys- 
icists, for  they  already,  without  knowing  it,  have  invaded  that 
"dark  backward  and  abysm  of  time"  which  the  Ouspenskian 
philosophy  lights  up — and  are  by  way  of  losing  themselves  there. 

That  is  to  say,  in  certain  of  their  calculations  they  are  em- 
ploying four  mutually  interchangeable  co-ordinates,  three  of  space 
and  one  of  time.  In  other  words,  they  use  time  as  though  it  were 
a  dimension  of  space.  Ouspensky  tells  them  the  reason  they  are 
able  to  do  this. — Time  is  the  fourth  dimension  of  space  imper- 
fectly sensed — apprehended  by  consciousness  successively,  and 
thereby  creating  the  temporal  illusion. 

Moreover,  mathematicians  are  perforce  concerning  themselves 
with  magnitudes  to  which  the  ordinary  logic  no  longer  applies. 
Ouspensky  presents  a  new  logic — the  logic  of  intuition — remov- 
ing at  a  stroke  all  of  the  nightmare  aspects,  the  preposterous  para- 
doxes of  the  new  mathematics,  which  by  reason  of  its  extraordin- 
ary development  has  shattered  the  old  logic,  as  a  growing  oak 
shatters  the  containing  jar. 

It  is  from  the  philosophic  camp,  no  doubt,  that  the  book  will 
receive  its  sharpest  criticism,  on  account  of  the  author's  lese- 
majeste  toward  so  many  of  the  crowned  kings  of  philosophic 
thought,  and  his  devastating  assault  on  positivism — that  inevit- 
able by-product  of  our  materialistic  way  of  looking  at  the  world. 
His  attempt  to  prove  the  Kantian  problem — the  subjectivity  of 
space  and  time — doubtless  will  be  acutely  challenged,  and  with 
some  chance  of  success,  because  the  two  chapters  devoted  to  this 
are  the  least  convincing  of  the  book.  But  no  one  heretofore  has 
even  attempted  to  absolutely  demonstrate  or  successfully  con- 
trovert the  staggering  proposition  advanced  by  Kant  regarding 
space  and  time  as  forms  of  consciousness. 

Whatever  the  verdict  of  the  philosophical  pundits  of  the  day 
and  hour,  whether  favorable  or  otherwise,  Ouspensky  is  sure  of  a 
place  in  the  hierarchy  of  philosophers,  for  he  has  essayed  to  solve 


INTRODUCTION 

the  most  profound  problems  of  human  existence  by  the  aid  of  the 
binocular  vision  of  a  born  mathematician  and  an  intuitive  mystic. 
Starting  from  the  irreducible  minimum  of  knowledge,  he  has  car- 
ried philosophy  into  regions  not  hitherto  explored. 

To  persons  of  an  artistic  or  devotional  bent  the  book  will  be  as 
water  in  the  desert.  These,  always  at  a  disadvantage  among  the 
purely  practical-minded,  by  whom  they  are  outnumbered  twenty 
to  one,  will  find  in  Ouspensky  a  champion  whose  weapon  is  math- 
ematical certitude,  the  very  thing  by  which  the  practical  minded 
swear.  These,  their  enemies,  he  puts  to  rout,  holds  up  to  ridicule. 
He  applauds  their  efforts  to  escape  into  the  "world  of  the  won- 
drous," and  justifies  the  faith  that  is  in  them. 

But  most  of  all,  Ouspensky  will  be  loved  by  all  true  lovers,  for 
his  chapter  on  the  subject  of  love.  We  have  had  Schopenhauer  on 
love,  and  Freud  on  love,  but  what  dusty  answers  do  they  give  to 
the  soul  of  a  lover!  Edward  Carpenter  comes  much  nearer  the 
mark,  but  Ouspensky  penetrates  to  its  very  center.  It  is  because 
our  loves  are  so  dampened  by  our  egotisms,  our  cynicisms  and  our 
cowardices  that  we  rot  and  smoulder  instead  of  bursting  into  puri- 
fying flame.  Just  as  Goethe's  Werther,  with  its  sex-sentimentality, 
is  said  to  have  provoked  an  epidemic  of  suicides,  so  may  Tertium 
Organum — which  restores  love  to  that  high  heaven  from  whence 
descend  every  beauty  and  benison — inaugurate  a  renascence  of 
love  and  joy. 

From  one  point  of  view  this  is  a  terrible  book :  there  is  a  revolu- 
tion in  it — a  revolution  of  the  very  poles  of  thought.  Some  it  will 
rob  of  their  dearest  illusions,  it  will  cut  the  very  ground  from  be- 
neath their  feet,  it  will  consign  them  to  the  Abyss.  It  is  a  great 
destroyer  of  complacency.  Yes,  this  is  a  dangerous  book — but 
then,  life  is  like  that. 


It  is  beyond  the  province  of  this  Introduction  either  to  outline 
the  Ouspenskian  philosophy  at  any  length,  or  to  discuss  it  criti- 
cally; but  some  slight  indication  of  its  drift  may  be  of  assistance  to 
the  reader. 

The  book  might  have  appropriately  been  called  A  Study  of  Con- 
sciousness, for  Ouspensky  comes  early  to  the  conclusion  that  all 
other  methods  of  approach  to  an  understanding  of  the  "enigmas 
of  the  world"  are  vain.    Chapters  I  to  VII,  inclusive,  deal  with  the 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

problem  of  the  world-order  by  the  objective  method.  The  author 
erects  an  elaborate  scaffolding  for  his  future  edifice,  and  after  it 
has  served  its  purpose,  throws  it  down.  Aware  of  the  deficiencies 
of  the  objective  method,  and  having  made  the  reader  conscious  of 
them  too,  he  suddenly  alters  his  system  of  attack.  From  chap- 
ter VIII  onward,  he  undertakes  the  study  of  the  world  order  from 
the  standpoint  of  subjectivity — of  consciousness. 

By  a  method  both  ingenious  and  new,  he  correlates  the  different 
grades  of  consciousness  observable  in  nature — those  of  vegetable- 
animal,  animal  and  man — with  the  space  sense,  showing  that  as 
consciousness  changes  and  develops,  the  sense  of  space  changes 
and  develops  too.  That  is  to  say,  the  dimensionality  of  the  world 
depends  on  the  development  of  consciousness.  Man,  having 
reached  the  third  stage  in  that  development,  has  a  sense  of  three- 
dimensional  space — and  for  no  other  reason. 

Ouspensky  concludes  that  nothing  except  consciousness  unfolds, 
develops,  and  as  there  appears  to  be  no  limit  to  this  development 
he  conceives  of  space  as  the  multi-dimensional  mirror  of  con- 
sciousness and  of  time  and  motion  as  illusion — what  appears  to  be 
time  and  motion  being  in  reality  only  the  movement  of  conscious- 
ness upon  a  higher  space. 

The  problem  of  superior  states  of  consciousness  in  which  "there 
shall  be  time  no  longer"  is  thus  directly  opened  up,  and  in  dis- 
cussing their  nature  and  method  of  attainment,  he  quotes  freely 
from  the  rich  literature  of  mysticism.  Instead  of  attempting  to 
rationalize  these  higher  states  of  consciousness,  as  some  authors 
do,  he  applies  to  them  the  logic  of  intuition — "Tertium  Organum" 
— paradoxical  from  the  standpoint  of  ordinary  reason,  but  true  in 
relation  to  the  noumenal  world. 

Joseph  Conrad  and  Ford  Madox  Hueffer  once  wrote  a  novel 
called  The  Inheritors  and  by  this  they  meant  the  people  of  the 
fourth  dimension.  Though  there  is  small  resemblance  between 
Ouspensky 's  "superman"  and  theirs,  it  is  his  idea  also  that  those 
of  this  world  who  succeed  in  developing  higher-dimensional,  or 
"cosmic  consciousness"  will  indeed  inherit — will  control  and  reg- 
ulate human  affairs  by  reason  of  their  superior  wisdom  and  power. 
In  this,  and  in  this  alone,  dwells  the  "salvation"of  the  world.  His 
superman  is  far  removed  from  the  "blond  beast"of  Nietzche:  it  is 
the  "just  man  made  perfect"  of  the  Evangelist.  This  struggle  for 
mastery  between  the  blind  and  unconscious  forces  of  materialism 


INTRODUCTION 

on  the  one  hand,  and  the  spiritually  illumined  on  the  other,  is  al- 
ready upon  us,  and  all  conflicts  between  nations,  peoples  and 
classes  must  now  be  interpreted  in  terms  of  this  greater  warfare 
between  "two  races"  of  men,  in  which  the  superior  minority  will 
either  conquer  or  disappear. 

These  people  of  the  fourth  dimension  are  in  the  world  but  not  of 
it:  their  range  is  far  wider  than  this  slum  of  space.  In  them  dor- 
mant faculties  are  alert.  Like  birds  of  the  air,  their  fitting  symbol, 
they  are  at  home  in  realms  which  others  cannot  enter,  even  though 
already  "there".  Nor  are  these  heavenly  eagles  confined  to  the 
narrow  prison  of  the  breast.  Their  bodies  are  as  tools  which  they 
may  take  up  or  lay  aside  at  will.  This  phenomenal  world,  which 
seems  so  real,  is  to  them  as  insubstantial  as  the  image  of  a  land- 
scape in  a  lake.    Such  is  the  Ouspenskian  superman. 

The  entire  book  is  founded  upon  a  new  generalization — new, 
that  is,  in  philosophy,  but  already  familiar  to  mathematicians 
and  theoretical  physicists.  This  generalization  involves  startling 
and  revolutionary  ideas  in  regard  to  space,  time  and  motion,  far 
removed  from  those  of  Euclidian  geometry  and  classical  physics. 

Ouspensky  handles  these  new  ideas  in  an  absolutely  original 
way,  making  them  the  basis  of  an  entire  philosophy  of  life.  To 
the  timid  and  purblind  this  philosophy  will  be  nothing  short  of 
terrifying,  but  to  the  clear-eyed  and  steadfast  watcher,  shipwreck- 
ed on  this  shoal  of  time,  these  vistas,  overflowing  with  beauty, 
strangeness,  doubt,  terror  and  divinity,  will  be  more  welcome 
than  anything  in  life. 

"Fear  not  the  new  generalization" 


Ouspensky's  clearness  of  thought  is  mirrored  in  a  corresponding 
clarity  of  expression,  with  every  aid  to  understanding  of  which  his 
office  of  teacher  of  mathematics  has  given  him  command.  He 
sometimes  repeats  the  difficult  and  important  passages  in  an  al- 
tered form  of  words,  he  uses  short  sentences  and  short  paragraphs, 
and  italicizes  significant  phrases  and  significant  words.  He  de- 
fines where  definition  is  needed,  and  suggests  collateral  trains  of 
thought  with  a  skill  which  makes  the  reader  who  is  intuitive  a 
creator  on  his  own  account.  Schopenhauer  has  said  that  it  is  al- 
ways a  sign  of  genius  to  treat  difficult  matters  simply,  as  it  is  a 
sign  of  dullness  to  make  simple  matters  appear  recondite.    Ous- 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

pensky  exhibits  this  order  of  genius,  and  that  other,  mentioned  by 
Schopenhauer,  which  consists  in  choosing  always  the  apt  illus- 
tration, the  illuminating  simile. 

The  translators  have  tried  to  be  rigidly  true  to  the  Russian  or- 
iginal, as  has  been  said,  and  they  have  been  at  great  pains  to  verify 
every  English  quotation  so  far  as  has  been  possible.  The  only 
liberty  they  have  taken  with  the  text  consists  in  the  omission  of 
a  brief  personal  reference  which  might  possibly  give  offense. 

Rochester,  N.  Y.  Claude  Bragdon 

August  1,  1919 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I 

What  do  we  know  and  what  do  we  not  know?  Our  data,  and  the  things  sought  for. 
The  unknown  mistaken  for  the  known.  Matter  and  motion.  What  does  positive 
philosophy  come  to?  Identity  of  the  unknown:  x  =  y,  y=x.  What  we  really 
know.  The  existence  of  consciousness  in  us,  and  of  the  world  outside  of  us.  Dual- 
ism or  monism?  Subjective  and  objective  knowledge.  Where  do  the  causes  of  the 
sensations  lie?  Kant's  system.  Time  and  space.  Kant  and  the  "ether."  Mach's 
observation.    With  what  does  the  physicist  really  deal? 1 

CHAPTER  II 

A  new  view  of  the  Kantian  problem.  The  ideas  of  Hinton.  The  "space  sense"  and  its 
evolution.  A  system  for  the  development  of  a  sense  of  the  fourth  dimension  by  ex- 
ercises with  colored  cubes.  The  geometrical  conception  of  space.  Three  perpen- 
diculars—why three?  Can  everything  existing  be  measured  by  three  perpendicu- 
lars? Facts  physical  and  metaphysical.  The  indices  of  existence.  Reality  of  ideas. 
Insufficient  evidence  of  the  existence  of  matter  and  motion.  Matter  and  motion 
are  only  logical  concepts,  like  "good"  and  "evil." 13 

CHAPTER  III 

What  may  we  learn  about  the  fourth  dimension  by  a  study  of  the  geometrical  relations 
within  our  space?  What  should  be  the  relation  between  a  three-dimensional  body 
and  one  of  four  dimensions?  The  four-dimensional  body  as  the  tracing  of  the 
movement  of  a  three-dimensional  body  in  a  direction  which  is  not  confined  within 
it.  A  four-dimensional  body  as  containing  an  infinite  number  of  three-dimensional 
bodies.  A  three-dimensional  body  as  a  section  of  a  four-dimensional  one.  Parts  of 
bodies  and  entire  bodies  in  three  and  in  four  dimensions.  The  incommensurability 
of  a  three-dimensional  and  a  four-dimensional  body.  A  material  atom  as  a  section 
of  a  four-dimensional  line 25 

CHAPTER  IV 

In  what  direction  may  the  fourth  dimension  lie?  What  is  motion?  Two  kinds  of  mo- 
tion—motion in  space  and  motion  in  time— which  are  contained  in  every  movement. 
What  is  time?  Two  ideas  contained  in  the  conception  of  time.  The  new  dimension 
of  space,  and  motion  upon  that  dimension.  Time  as  the  fourth  dimension  of  space. 
Impossibility  of  understanding  the  fourth  dimension  without  the  idea  of  motion. 
The  idea  of  motion  and  the  "time  sense."  The  time  sense  as  a  limit  (surface)  of  the 
space  sense.  Hinton  on  the  law  of  surfaces.  The  "ether"  as  a  surface.  Riemann's 
idea  concerning  the  translation  of  time  into  space  in  the  fourth  dimension.  Pres- 
ent, past  and  future.  Why  we  do  not  see  the  past  and  the  future.  Life  as  a  feeling 
of  one' sway.    Wundt  on  the  subject  of  our  sensuous  knowledge 29 

CHAPTER  V 

Four-dimensional  space.  "Temporal  body" — Linga  Sharira.  The  form  of  a  human 
body  from  birth  to  death.  Incommensurability  of  three-dimensional  and  four- 
dimensional  bodies.  Newton's  fluents.  The  unreality  of  constant  quantities  in  our 
world.  The  right  and  the  left  hands  in  three-dimensional  and  in  four-dimensional 
space.  Differences  between  three-dimensional  and  four-dimensional  space.  Not 
two  different  spaces,  but  two  different  methods  of  receptivity  of  one  and  the  same 
world 43 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

CHAPTER  VI 

Methods  of  investigation  of  the  problem  of  higher  dimensions.  The  analogy  between 
imaginary  worlds  of  different  dimensions.  The  one  dimensional  world  on  a  line. 
"Space"  and  "time"  of  a  one-dimensional  being.  The  two-dimensional  world  on  a 
plane.  "Space"  and  "time,"  "ether,"  "matter"  and  "motion"  of  a  two-dimension- 
al being.  Reality  and  illusion  on  a  plane.  The  impossibility  of  seeing  an  "angle." 
An  angle  as  motion.  The  incomprehensibility  to  a  two-dimensional  being  of  the 
functions  of  things  in  our  world.  Phenomena  and  noumena  of  a  two-dimensional 
being.    How  could  a  plane  being  comprehend  the  third  dimension?     ....         49 

CHAPTER  VII 

The  impossibility  of  the  mathematical  definition  of  dimensions.  Why  does  not  mathe- 
matics sense  dimensions?  The  entire  conditionality  of  the  representation  of  dimen- 
sions by  powers.  The  possibility  of  representing  all  powers  on  a  line.  Kant  and 
Lobachevsky.  The  difference  between  non-Euclidian  geometry  and  metageom- 
etry.  Where  shall  we  find  the  explanation  of  the  three-dimensionality  of  the  world 
if  Kant's  ideas  are  true?  Are  not  the  conditions  of  the  three-dimensionality  of  the 
world  confined  to  our  receptive  apparatus,  in  our  psyche? 65 

CHAPTER  VIII 

Our  receptive  apparatus.  Sensation.  Perception.  Conception.  Intuition.  Art  as 
the  language  of  the  future.  To  what  extent  does  the  three-dimensionality  of  the 
world  depend  upon  the  properties  of  our  receptive  apparatus?  What  might  prove 
this  interdependence?  Where  may  we  find  the  real  affirmation  of  this  interdepen- 
dence? The  animal  psyche.  In  what  does  it  differ  from  the  human?  Reflex  ac- 
tion. The  irritability  of  the  cell.  Instinct,.,  Pleasure-pain.  Emotional  thinking. 
Absence  of  concepts.  Language  oLanimals.  Logic  of  animals.  Different  degrees 
of  psychic  development  in  animals.   The  goose,  the  cat,  the  dog  and  the  monkey.         71 

CHAPTER  IX 

The  receptivity  of  the  world  by  a  man  and  by  an  animal.  Illusions  of  the  animal  and 
its  lack  of  control  of  the  receptive  faculties.  The  world  of  moving  planes.  Angles 
and  curves  considered  as  motion.  The  third  dimension  as  motion.  The  animal's 
two-dimensional  view  of  our  three-dimensional  world.  The  animal  as  a  real  two- 
dimensional  being.  Lower  animals  as  one-dimensional  beings.  The  time  and  space 
of  a  snail.  The  time  sense  as  an  imperfect  space  sense.  The  time  and  space  of  a 
dog.  The  change  in  the  world  coincident  with  a  change  in  the  psychic  apparatus. 
The  proof  of  Kant's  problem.  The  three-dimensional  world — an  illusory  percep- 
tion   89 

CHAPTER  X 

The  spatial  understanding  of  time.  The  angles  and  curves  of  the  fourth  dimension  in 
our  life.  Does  motion  exist  in  the  world  or  not?  Mechanical  motion  and  "life". 
Biological  phenomena  as  the  manifestation  of  motions  going  on  in  the  higher  di- 
mension. Evolution  of  the  space  sense.  The  growth  of  the  space  sense  and  the  dim- 
inution of  the  time  sense.  The  transformation  of  the  time  sense  into  the  space 
sense.  The  difficulties  of  our  language  and  of  our  concepts.  The  necessity  for 
seeking  a  method  of  spatial  expression  for  temporal  concepts.  Science  in  relation 
to  the  fourth  dimension.  The  solid  of  four  dimensions.  The  four-dimensional 
sphere 108 

CHAPTER  XI 

Science  and  the  problem  of  the  fourth  dimension.  The  address  of  Prof.  N.  A.  Oumoff 
before  the  Mendeleevsky  Convention  in  1911 — "The  Characteristic  Traits  and 
Problems  of  Contemporary  Scientific  Thought."    The  new  physics.    The  electro- 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

magnetic  theory.  The  principle  of  relativity.  The  works  of  Einstein  and  Min- 
kowsky. Simultaneous  existence  of  the  past  and  the  future.  The  Eternal  Now. 
Van  Manen's  book  about  occult  experiences.  The  drawing  of  a  four-dimensional 
figure 

CHAPTER  XII 


115 


Analysis  of  phenomena.  What  defines  different  orders  of  phenomena  for  us?  Methods 
and  forms  of  the  translation  of  one  order  of  phenomena  into  another.  Phenomena 
of  motion.  Phenomena  of  life.  Phenomena  of  consciousness.  The  central  ques- 
tion of  our  knowledge  of  the  world :  what  order  of  phenomena  is  generic  and  pro- 
duces the  others?  Can  the  origin  of  everything  lie  in  motion?  The  laws  of  the 
transformation  of  energy.  Simple  transformation  and  liberation  of  latent  energy. 
Different  liberating  forces  of  the  different  orders  of  phenomena.  The  force  of  me- 
chanical energy,  the  force  of  a  living  cell,  the  force  of  an  idea.  Phenomena  and  nou- 
mena  of  our  world !*• 

CHAPTER  XIII 

The  apparent  and  the  hidden  side  of  life.  Positivism  as  the  study  of  the  phenomenal 
side  of  life.  Of  what  does  the  "two-dimensionality"  of  positive  philosophy  con- 
sist? The  regarding  of  everything  upon  a  single  plane,  in  one  physical  sequence. 
The  streams  which  flow  underneath  the  earth.  What  can  the  study  of  life  as  a 
phenomenon  yield?  The  artificial  world  which  science  erects  for  itself.  The  un- 
reality of  finished  and  isolated  phenomena.    The  new  apprehension  of  the  world.    .    135 

CHAPTER  XIV 

The  voices  of  stones.  The  wall  of  a  church  and  the  wall  of  a  prison.  The  mast  of  a 
ship  and  a  gallows.  The  shadow  of  a  hangman  and  of  an  ascetic.  The  soul  of  a 
hangman  and  of  an  ascetic.  The  different  combinations  of  known  phenomena  in 
higher  space.  The  relationship  of  phenomena  which  appear  unrelated,  and  the  diff- 
erence between  phenomena  which  appear  similar.  How  shall  we  approach  the  nou- 
menal  world?  The  understanding  of  things  outside  the  categories  of  space  and 
time.  The  reality  of  many  "figures  of  speech."  The  occult  understanding  of 
energy.  The  letter  of  a  Hindu-occultist.  Art  as  the  knowledge  of  the  noumenal 
world.    What  we  see  and  what  we  do  not  see.    Plato's  dialogue  about  the  cavern.  .   151 

CHAPTER  XV 

Occultism  and  love.  Love  and  death.  Our  different  relation  to  the  problems  of  death 
and  to  the  problems  of  love.  What  is  lacking  in  our  understanding  of  love?  Love 
as  an  every-day  and  merely  psychological  phenomenon.  The  possibility  of  a  spiri- 
tual understanding  of  love.  The  creative  force  of  love.  The  negation  of  love.  Ma- 
terialism and  asceticism.  The  flight  from  love.  Love  and  mysticism.  The  "wond- 
rous" in  love.  Prof.  Lutoslawsky.  Leo  Tolstoy.  Nietzche  and  Edward  Carpen- 
ter on  love.    "The  Ocean  of  Sex." 161 

CHAPTER  XVI 

The  phenomenal  and  the  noumenal  side  of  man.  "Man-in-himself ."  How  do  we  know 
the  inner  side  of  man?  Can  we  know  of  the  existence  of  consciousness  in  condi- 
tions of  space  not  analogical  to  ours?  Brain  and  consciousness.  Unity  of  the 
world.  Logical  impossibility  of  the  simultaneous  existence  of  spirit  and  matter. 
Either  all  spirit  or  all  matter.  Rational  and  irrational  actions  in  nature  and  in  the 
life  of  man.  Can  rational  actions  exist  alongside  of  irrational?  The  world  as  an 
accidentally  self-created  mechanical  toy.  The  impossibility  of  consciousness  in  a 
mechanical  universe.  The  irreconcilability  of  mechanicalness  with  the  existence  of 
consciousness.  The  fact  of  human  consciousness  as  destroying  the  mechanistic  sys- 
tem. The  consciousness  of  other  sections  of  the  world.  How  may  we  know  about 
them?  Kant  concerning  "ghosts."  Spinoza  on  the  knowledge  of  the  invisible 
world.  Necessity  for  the  intellectual  definition  of  that  which  can  be,  and  that 
which  cannot  be  in  the  noumenal  world 17© 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

CHAPTER  XVII 

A  conscious  universe.  Different  forms  of  consciousness.  Different  lines  of  conscious- 
ness. Animated  nature.  The  souls  of  stones  and  the  souls  of  trees.  The  soul  of  a 
forest.  The  human  "I"  as  a  collective  consciousness.  Man  as  a  complex  being. 
Humanity  as  a  being.  The  world's  consciousness.  The  face  of  Mahadeva.  Prof. 
James  on  the  consciousness  of  the  universe.  Fechner's  ideas.  "Zendavesta." 
A  living  Earth 203 

CHAPTER  XVIII 

Consciousness  and  life.  Life  as  knowledge.  Consciousness  as  a  realization  of  exist- 
ence. Intellect  and  emotions.  Emotion  as  an  organ  of  knowledge.  The  evolution 
of  emotion  from  the  standpoint  of  knowledge.  Pure  and  impure  emotions.  Per- 
sonal and  super-personal  emotions.  The  elimination  of  self  elements  as  a  means  of 
approach  to  true  knowledge.  "Be  as  little  children."  "Blessed  are  the  pure  in 
heart."  The  value  of  morals  from  the  standpoint  of  knowledge.  The  defects  of  in- 
tellectualism.  Dreadnaughts  as  the  crown  of  intellectual  culture.  The  dangers  of 
morality.  Moral  esthetics.  Religion  and  art  as  organized  forms  of  emotional  know- 
ledge.   The  knowledge  of  God  and  the  knowledge  of  beauty 219 

CHAPTER  XIX 

The  intellectual  method.  Objective  and  subjective  knowledge.  The  study  of  the  Not- 
I  and  the  study  of  the  I.  Impossibility  of  the  objective  study  of  the  I.  The  limits 
of  objective  knowledge.  The  possibility  of  the  expansion  of  subjective  knowledge. 
The  absorption  of  all  Not-I  by  the  I.  The  ideas  of  Plotinus.  Different  forms  of 
consciousness.  Sleep  (the  potential  state  of  consciousness).  Dreams  (conscious- 
ness enclosed  in  itself,  reflected  from  itself).  Waking  consciousness  (dualistic  sen- 
sation of  the  world,  the  division  of  the  I  and  the  Not-I).  Ecstasy  (the  liberation  of 
theself).  "Turiya"  (the  absolute  consciousness  of  all,  as  of  the  self ) .  "Thedewdrop 
slips  into  the  shining  sea."    "Nirvana." 237 

CHAPTER  XX 

The  sense  of  infinity.  The  neophyte's  first  ordeal.  An  intolerable  sadness.  The  loss 
of  everything  real.  What  would  an  animal  feel  on  becoming  a  man?  The  transi- 
tion to  the  new  logic.  Our  logic  as  founded  on  the  observation  of  the  laws  of  the 
phenomenal  world.  Its  invalidity  for  the  study  of  the  world  of  noumena.  The 
necessity  for  another  logic.  Analogy  between  the  axioms  of  logic  and  of  mathema- 
tics. Two  mathematics.  The  mathematics  of  real  magnitudes  (infinite  and  vari- 
able) ;  and  the  mathematics  of  unreal,  imaginary  magnitudes  (finite  and  constant) . 
Transfinite  numbers — numbers  lying  beyond  infinity.  The  possibility  of  differ- 
ent infinities 251 

CHAPTER  XXI 

Man's  transition  to  a  higher  logic.  The  necessity  for  rejecting  everything  "real." 
"Poverty  of  the  spirit."  The  recognition  of  the  infinite  alone  as  real.  Laws  of  the 
infinite.  Logic  of  the  finite — the  "Organon"  of  Aristotle  and  the  "Novum  Organ- 
urn'  of  Bacon.  Logic  of  the  infinite — Teriium  Organum.  The  higher  logic  as  an 
instrument  of  thought,  as  a  key  to  the  mysteries  of  nature,  to  the  hidden  side  of 
life,  to  the  world  of  noumena.  A  definition  of  the  world  of  noumena  on  the  basis  of 
all  the  foregoing.  The  impression  of  the  noumenal  world  on  an  unprepared  con- 
sciousness. "The  thrice  unknown  darkness  in  the  contemplation  of  which  all 
knowledge  is  resolved  into  ignorance." 263 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

CHAPTER  XXII 

«Theosophy'ofMaxMiiller.  Ancient  India.  Philosophy  of  the  Vedanta  Tattwam 
^Knowledge  by  means  of  the  expansion  of  ™ousnes*^^^ 
cism  of  different  ages  and  peoples.  Unity  of  experiences.  Tertium  Organumasj. 
keTto  mysScism.  Signs  of  the  noumenal  world.  Treatise  о  Plotinus  On  Intel- 
fi2b  BeSy"  as  a  misunderstood  system  of  higher  logic.  Illuminations  in  Jacob 
Boehme  "A  harp  of  many  strings,  of  which  each  string  is  a  separate  instrument, 
wht'he  whole Гоп1у  one W?  Mystics  of  "The  Loveof*e ^J£$™ 
Dorotheus  and  others.  Clement  of  Alexandria.  Lao-Tzu  and  cnuang  izu. 
"St  on  the  Path."  "The  Voice  of  the  Silence."  Mohammedan  mystics.  Poet- 
r o( the  Suffs. Mystical  states  under  narcotics.  The  anaesthetic  revelation^ Ex- 
S^nStaSftof^ames.  Dostoyevsky  on  "time"  (The  Idiot).  Influence  of  na-  ^ 
ture  on  the  soul  of  man 

CHAPTER  XXIII 

"Cosmic  Consciousness"  of  Dr.  Bucke.   The  three  forms  of  cons^io"^ff4acCg!;ffill0g0^ 

Dr  Bucke  Simple  consciousness,  or  the  consciousness  of  animals  belt  con 
sc  ousness?or  the  consciousness  of  man.  Cosmic  consciousness  In  what  is  t  ex- 
pressed?Sensation,  perception,  concept,  higher  moral  concept-creative  intui- 
ST  Men  of  cosmic  consciousness.  Adam's  fall  into  sin.  The  ^edge  оЩ 
and  evil.  Christ  and  the  salvation  of  man.  Commentary  on  Dr  Bucke s  book 
Srth  of  the  new  humanity.  Two  races.  Superman.  Table  of  the  four  forms  of  ^ 
the  manifestation  of  consciousness 

EVOLUTION.  OR  THE  CULTURE  OF  CONSCIOUSNESS 338 

.      .  340 
CONCLUSION 

TABLE  OF  THE  FOUR  FORMS  OF  CONSCIOUSNESS 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM 


"And  swear  .  .  .  that  there  should  be 

TIME   NO   LONGER." 

REVELATIONS,  X.  6 

"  .  .  .  .  That  ye,  being  rooted  and  grounded 
in  love  may  be  able  to  comprehend  with  al! 
saints   what  is  the   breadth  and  length  and 

DEPTH   AND    HEIGHT" 

Paul  the  Apostle 

THE    EPISTLE   TO   THE    EPHESIANS.  III.  18 


CHAPTER  I 

What  do  we  know  and  what  do  we  not  know?  Our  data,  and  the 
things  for  which  we  seek.  The  unknown  mistaken  for  the  known. 
Matter  and  motion.  What  does  the  positive  philosophy  come  to/ 
Identity  of  the  unknown:  x  =  y.  y  =  x.  What  we  really  know 
The  existence  of  consciousness  in  us,  and  of  the  world  outside  ot 
us.  Dualism  or  monism?  Subjective  and  objective  knowledge. 
Where  do  the  causes  of  the  sensations  lie?  Kant  s  system.  lime 
and  Space.  Kant  and  the  "ether."  Mach's  observation.  With 
what  does  the  physicist  really  deal? 

"Learn  to  discern  the  real  from  the  false" 

THE    VOICE    OF   THE    SILENCE 

H.  P.  B. 

HE  most  difficult  thing  is  to  know  what  we  do  know, 
and  what  we  do  not  know. 

Therefore,  desiring  to  know  anything,  we  shall  be- 
fore all  else  determine  what  we  accept  as  given,  and 
what  as  demanding  definition  and  proof:  that  is, 
determine  what  we  know  already,  and  what  we  wish  to  know. 
In  relation  to  the  knowledge  of  the  world  and  of  ourselves,  the 
conditions  would  be  ideal  could  we  venture  to  accept  nothing  as 
given,  and  count  all  as  demanding  definition  and  proof.  In  other 
words,  it  would  be  best  to  assume  that  we  know  nothing,  and 
make  this  our  point  of  departure. 

But  unfortunately  such  conditions  are  impossible  to  create. 
Knowledge  must  start  from  some  foundation,  something  must  be 
recognized  as  known,  or  we  shall  be  obliged  always  to  define  one 
unknown  by  means  of  another. 

Looking  at  the  matter  from  another  point  of  view,  we  shall 
hesitate  to  accept  as  the  known  things— as  the  given  ones— those 
in  the  main  completely  unknown,  only  presupposed,  and  there- 
fore the  things  sought  for.  Should  we  do  this,  we  are  likely  to  fall 
into  such  a  dilemma  as  that  in  which  positive  philosophy  now 
finds  itself.  For  a  long  time  this  was  founded  on  the  idea  of  the 
existence  of  matter  (materialism),  and  now  it  is  founded  on  the 
conception  of  the  existence  of  energy:  that  is,  of  a  force,  or  motion 


2  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

(energeticism) ,  though  in  reality  matter  and  motion  were  always 
the  unknown  x  and  y,  and  were  defined  by  means  of  one  another. 

It  must  be  perfectly  clear  to  everyone  that  it  is  impossible  to  ac- 
cept the  thing  sought  as  the  given;  and  impossible  to  define  one  un- 
known by  means  of  another.  The  result  is  nothing  but  the  iden- 
tity of  the  unknown :  x  =  у ,  у  =  x. 

This  identity  of  the  unknown  is  the  ultimate  conclusion  to  which 
positive  philosophy  comes. 

Matter  is  that  in  which  proceed  the  changes  called  motion:  and 
motions  are  those  changes  which  proceed  in  matter. 


But  what  do  we  know  ? 

We  know  that  with  the  very  first  awakening  of  self -conscious- 
ness, man  is  confronted  with  two  obvious  facts : 

The  existence  of  the  world  in  which  he  lives;  and  the  existence  of 
consciousness  in  himself. 

Neither  of  these  can  he  prove  or  disprove,  but  they  are  facts: 
they  constitute  reality  for  him. 

It  is  possible  to  meditate  upon  the  mutual  correlation  of  these 
facts.  It  is  possible  to  try  to  reduce  them  to  one;  that  is,  to  re- 
gard consciousness  as  a  part,  or  function  of  the  world,  or  the 
world  as  a  part,  or  function  of  consciousness.  But  such  a  pro- 
cedure constitutes  a  departure  from  facts,  and  all  such  considera- 
tions of  the  world  and  of  the  self,  to  the  ordinary  non-philosophical 
mind,  will  not  have  the  character  of  obviousness.  On  the  contrary 
the  sole  obvious  fact  remains  the  antithesis  of  /  and  Not-I — con- 
sciousness and  the  world. 

Further  on  we  shall  return  to  this  fundamental  thesis.  But 
thus  far  we  have  no  basis  on  which  to  found  a  contradiction  of  the 
obvious  fact  of  the  existence  of  ourselves — i.  е.,  of  our  conscious- 
ness— and  of  the  world  in  which  we  live.  This  we  shall  therefore 
accept  as  the  given. 

This  however  is  the  only  thing  that  we  have  the  right  to  accept 
as  given:  all  the  rest  demands  proof  and  definition  in  terms  of 
these  two  given  data. 

Space,  with  its  extension;  time,  with  the  idea  of  before,  now, 
after;  quantity,  mass,  substantiality;  number,  equality  and  in- 
equality; identity  and  difference;  cause  and  effect,  the  ether, 
atoms,  electrons,  energy,  life,  death — all  things  that  form  the 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  3 

foundation  of  our  so-called  knowledge:  these  are  the  unknown 
things. 

The  existence  of  consciousness  in  us,  and  the  existence  of  the 
world  outside  of  us — from  these  two  fundamental  data  imme- 
diately proceed  our  common  and  clearly  understood  division  of 
everything  that  we  know  into  subjective  and  objective. 

Everything  that  we  accept  as  a  property  of  the  world,  we  call 
objective;  and  everything  that  we  accept  as  a  property  of  con- 
sciousness, we  call  subjective. 

The  subjective  world  we  recognize  directly:  it  is  in  ourselves — we 
are  one  with  it. 

The  objective  world  we  picture  to  ourselves  as  existing  some- 
where outside  of  us — we  and  it  are  different  things. 

It  seems  to  us  that  if  we  should  close  our  eyes,  then  the  objective 
world  would  continue  to  exist,  such  as  we  just  saw  it;  and  if  con- 
sciousness were  to  cease,  and  our  "I"  to  disappear,  so  would  the 
subjective  world  disappear — yet  the  objective  world  would  exist 
as  before,  as  it  existed  at  the  time  when  we  were  not;  when  our 
subjective  world  was  not. 

Our  relation  to  the  objective  world  is  most  exactly  defined  by 
the  fact  that  we  perceive  it  as  existing  in  time  and  space;  other- 
wise, out  of  these  conditions,  we  can  neither  conceive  nor  imagine 
it.  In  general,  we  say  that  the  objective  world  consists  of  things 
and  phenomena,  i.  е.,  things  and  changes  in  states  of  things.  The 
phenomena  exist  for  us  in  time;  the  things,  in  space. 

But  such  a  division  of  the  subjective  and  objective  world  does 
not  satisfy  us. 

By  means  of  reasoning  we  can  establish  the  fact  that  in  reality 
we  know  only  our  own  sensations,  perceptions  and  conceptions, 
and  we  cognize  the  objective  world  by  projecting  outside  of  our- 
selves the  causes  of  our  sensations,  presupposing  them  to  contain 
these  causes. 

Then  we  find  that  our  knowledge  of  the  subjective  and  of  the 
objective  world  as  well,  can  be  true  and  false,  correct  and  incorrect. 

The  criterion  for  the  definition  of  correctness  or  incorrectness 
of  our  knowledge  of  the  subjective  world  is  the  form  of  the  rela- 
tions of  one  sensation  to  others,  and  the  force  and  character  of  the 
sensation  itself.  In  other  words,  the  correctness  of  one  sensation 
is  verified  by  the  comparison  of  it  with  another  of  which  we  are 
more  sure,  or  by  the  intensity  and  "taste"  of  a  given  sensation. 


4  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

The  criterion  for  the  definition  of  correctness  or  incorrectness 
of  our  knowledge  of  the  objective  world  is  the  very  same.  It  seems 
to  us  that  we  define  the  things  and  phenomena  of  the  objective 
world  by  means  of  comparing  them  among  themselves;  and  we 
think  we  find  the  laws  of  their  existence  outside  of  us,  and  inde- 
pendent of  our  perception  of  them.  But  it  is  an  illusion.  We 
know  nothing  about  things  separately  from  us;  and  we  have  no 
other  means  of  verifying  the  correctness  of  our  knowledge  of  the 
objective  world  but  by  sensations. 


Since  the  remotest  antiquity  the  question  of  our  relation  to 
the  true  causes  of  our  sensations  constituted  the  main  subject  of 
philosophical  research.  Men  have  always  had  some  discussion 
of  this  question,  some  answer  for  it.  And  these  answers  have 
vacillated  between  two  poles,  from  the  full  negation  of  the 
causes  themselves,  and  the  assertion  that  the  causes  of  sensa- 
tions are  contained  within  ourselves  and  not  in  anything  outside 
of  us — up  to  the  recognition  that  we  know  these  causes,  that  they 
are  embodied  in  the  phenomena  of  the  outer  world,  that  these 
phenomena  constitute  the  cause  of  sensations;  and  that  the  cause 
of  all  observed  phenomena  lies  in  the  movement  of  "atoms",  and 
the  oscillations  of  the  "ether".  It  is  believed  that  if  we  cannot 
observe  these  motions  and  oscillations  it  is  only  because  we  have 
not  sufficiently  powerful  instruments,  and  that  when  such  instru- 
ments are  at  our  disposal  we  shall  be  able  to  see  the  movements 
of  atoms  as  well  as  we  see,  through  powerful  telescopes,  stars  the 
very  existence  of  which  were  never  guessed. 


In  modern  philosophy  Kant's  system  occupies  a  middle  posi- 
tion in  relation  to  this  problem  of  the  causes  of  sensations,  not 
sharing  either  of  these  extreme  views.  Kant  proved  that  the 
causes  of  our  sensations  are  in  the  outside  world,  but  that  we  can- 
not know  these  causes  through  any  sensuous  approach — that  is, 
by  such  means  as  we  know  phenomena — and  that  we  can  not 
know  these  causes,  and  will  never  know  them. 

Kant  established  the  fact  that  everything  that  is  known 
through  the  senses  is  known  in  terms  of  time  and  space,  and  that 
out  of  time  and  space  we  cannot  know  anything  by  way  of  the 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  о 

senses;  that  time  and  space  are  necessary  conditions  of  sensuous 
receptivity  (i.  е.,  receptivity  by  means  of  the  five  organs  of 
sense).  Moreover,  what  is  most  important,  he  established  the 
fact  that  extension  in  space  and  existence  in  time  are  not  proper- 
ties appertaining  to  things,  but  just  the  properties  of  our  sensuous 
receptivity;  that  in  reality,  apart  from  our  sensuous  knowledge 
of  them,  things  exist  independently  of  time  and  space,  but  we  can 
never  perceive  them  out  of  time  and  space,  and  perceiving  things 
and  phenomena  thus  sensuously,  by  virtue  of  it  we  impose  upon 
them  the  conditions  of  time  and  space,  as  belonging  to  our  form 
of  perception. 

Thus  space  and  time,  defining  everything  that  we  cognize  by 
sensuous  means,  are  in  themselves  just  forms  of  consciousness, 
categories  of  our  intellect,  the  prism  through  which  we  regard 
the  world — or  in  other  words  space  and  time  do  not  represent 
properties  of  the  world,  but  just  properties  of  our  knowledge  of 
the  world  gained  through  our  sensuous  organism.  Consequently 
the  world,  until  by  these  means  we  come  into  relation  to  it,  has 
neither  extension  in  space  nor  existence  in  time;  these  are  proper- 
ties which  we  add  to  it. 

Cognitions  of  space  and  time  arise  in  our  intellect  during  its 
touch  with  the  external  world  by  means  of  the  organs  of  sense, 
and  do  not  exist  in  the  external  world  apart  from  our  contact 

with  it.  . 

Space  and  time  are  categories  of  intellect,  i.  е.,  properties  which 
are  ascribed  by  us  to  the  external  world.  They  are  signal  posts, 
signs  put  up  by  ourselves  because  we  cannot  picture  the  external 
world  without  their  help.  They  are  graphics  by  which  we  repre- 
sent the  world  to  ourselves.  Projecting  outside  of  ourselves  the 
causes  of  our  sensations,  we  are  designing  mentally  (and  only 
mentally)  those  causes  in  space,  and  we  picture  continuous 
reality  to  ourselves  as  a  series  of  moments  of  time  following  one 
another.  This  is  necessary  for  us  because  a  thing  having  no 
definite  extension  in  space,  not  occupying  a  certain  part  of  space 
and  not  lasting  a  certain  length  of  time  does  not  exist  for  us  at  all. 
That  is,  a  thing  not  in  space,  divorced  from  the  idea  of  space,  and 
not  included  in  the  category  of  space,  will  not  differ  from  some 
other  thing  in  any  particular;  it  will  occupy  the  very  same  place, 
will  coincide  with  it.  Also,  all  phenomena  not  in  time,  divorced 
from  the  idea  of  time,  not  taken  in  this  or  that  fashion  from  the 


6  TERTITJM  ORGANUM 

standpoint  of  before,  now,  after,  would  proceed  for  us  as  though 
they  were  simultaneously  moving  among  themselves,  and  our 
weak  intellect  would  not  be  able  to  distinguish  one  moment  in  the 
infinite  variety. 

Therefore  our  consciousness  segregates  out  of  a  chaos  of  im- 
pressions, separate  groups,  as  we  construct  in  space  and  time  the 
perceptions  of  things  according  to  these  groups  of  impressions. 

It  is  necessary  for  us  to  divide  things  somehow,  and  we  divide 
them  into  the  categories  of  space  and  time. 

But  we  should  remember  that  these  divisions  exist  only  in  us, 
in  our  knowledge  of  things,  and  not  in  the  things  themselves; 
that  we  do  not  know  the  true  relations  of  things  among  them- 
selves, and  the  real  things  we  do  not  know,  but  only  phantoms, 
visions  of  things — we  do  not  know  the  relations  existing  among 
the  things  in  reality.  At  the  same  time  we  quite  definitely  know 
that  our  division  of  things  into  the  categories  of  space  and  time  does 
not  at  all  correspond  to  the  division  of  things  in  themselves,  inde- 
pendently of  our  receptivity  of  them;  and  we  quite  definitely  know 
that  if  there  exists  any  division  at  all  among  things  in  themselves, 
it  will  in  no  case  be  a  division  in  terms  of  space  and  time,  because 
these  are  not  a  property  of  things,  but  of  our  knowledge  of  things 
gained  through  the  senses.  Moreover,  we  do  not  know  if  it  is 
even  possible  to  distinguish  those  divisions  which  we  see,  i.  е.,  in 
space  and  time,  if  things  are  looked  at  not  through  human  eyes, 
not  from  the  human  standpoint.  In  point  of  fact  we  do  not  know 
but  that  our  world  would  present  an  entirely  different  aspect  for 
a  differently  built  organism. 

We  cannot  perceive  things  as  images  outside  of  the  categories  of 
space  and  time,  but  we  constantly  think  of  them  outside  of  space 
and  time. 

When  we  say  that  table,  we  picture  the  table  to  ourselves  in  space 
and  time;  but  when  we  say  an  object  made  of  wood,  not  meaning 
any  definite  thing,  but  speaking  generally,  it  will  relate  to  all 
things  made  of  wood  throughout  the  world,  and  in  all  ages.  An 
imaginative  person  could  conceive  that  we  are  referring  to  some 
great  thing  made  of  wood,  composed  of  all  objects  whenever  and 
wherever  wooden  things  existed,  these  forming  its  constituent 
atoms,  as  it  were. 

We  do  not  comprehend  all  these  matters  quite  clearly,  but  in 
general  it  is  plain  that  we  think  in  space  and  time  by  perceptions 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  ' 

only;   but  by   concepts   we  think  independently  of  space  and 
time. 

Kant  named  his  views  critical  idealism,  in  contradistinction  to 
dogmatic  idealism,  of  which  Berkeley  was  a  representative. 

According  to  dogmatic  idealism,  all  the  world,  all  things— i  е., 
the  true  causes  of  our  sensations— do  not  exist  except  in  our  con- 
sciousness: they  exist  only  so  far  as  we  know  them.  The  entire 
world  perceived  by  us  is  just  a  reflection  of  ourselves. 

Kantian  idealism  recognizes  a  world  of  causes  outside  ot  us,  but 
asserts  that  we  cannot  know  the  world  by  means  of  sensuous  per- 
ception, and  everything  that  we  perceive,  generally  speaking,  is 
of  our  own  creation— the  product  of  a  cognizing  being. 

So,  according  to  Kant,  everything  that  we  find  in  things  is  put 
in  them  by  ourselves.     Independently  of  ourselves,  we  do  not 
know  what  the  world  is  like.     And  our  cognition  of  things  has 
nothing  in  common  with  the  things  as  they  are  outside  of  us— that 
is,  in  themselves.    Furthermore,  and  most  important,  our  ignor- 
ance of  things  in  themselves  does  not  depend  upon  our  insufficient 
knowledge,  but  it  is  due  to  the  fact  that  by  means  of  sensuous 
perception  we  cannot  know  the  world  correctly  at  all.     lnat  is 
to  say,  we  cannot  truly  declare  that  although  now  we  perhaps 
know  little,  presently  we  shall  know  more,  and  at  length  shall 
come  to  a  correct  understanding  of  the  world.    It  is  not  true  be- 
cause our  experimental  knowledge  is  not  a  confused  perception 
of  a  real  world.    It  is  a  very  acute  perception  of  an  entirely  unreal 
world  appearing  round  about  us  at  the  moment  of  our  contact 
with  the  world  of  true  causes,  to  which  we  cannot  find  the  way 
because  we  are  lost  in  an  unreal  "material"  world.— For  this 
reason  the  extension  of  the  objective  sciences  does  not  brmg  us 

any  nearer  to  the  knowledge  of  things  in  themselves,  or  ot  true 
causes. 

In  "A  Critique  of  Pure  Reason"  Kant  affirms  that: 
Nothing  which  is  intuited  in  space  is  a  thing  in  itself,  and  space  is  not 
a  form  which  belongs  as  a  property  to  things;  but  objects  are  quite  un- 
known to  us  in  themselves,  and  what  we  call  outward  objects  are  nothing 
else  but  mere  representations  of  our  sensibility,  whose  form  is  space,  but 
whose  real  correlated  thing  in  itself  is  not  known  by  means  of  these 
representations,  nor  ever  can  be,  but  respecting  which,  in  experience, 
no  inquiry  is  ever  made. 


8  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

The  things  which  we  intuit  are  not  in  themselves  the  same  as  our  rep- 
resentation of  them  in  intuition,  nor  are  their  relations  in  themselves 
so  constituted  as  they  appear  to  us;  and  if  we  take  away  the  subject,  or 
even  only  the  subjective  constitution  of  our  senses  in  general,  then  not 
only  the  nature  and  relations  of  objects  in  space  and  time  disappear, 
but  even  space  and  time  themselves. 

What  may  be  the  nature  of  objects  considered  as  things  in  themselves 
and  without  reference  to  the  receptivity  of  our  sensibility  is  quite  un- 
known to  us.  We  know  nothing  more  than  our  own  mode  of  perceiving 
them,  which  is  peculiar  to  us  and  which  though  not  of  necessity  pertain- 
ing to  every  animated  being,  is  so  to  the  whole  human  race. 

Supposing  that  we  should  carry  our  empirical  intuition  even  to  the 
very  highest  degree  of  clearness  we  should  not  thereby  advance  one  step 
nearer  to  the  constitution  of  objects  as  things  in  themselves. 

To  say  then  that  our  sensibility  is  nothing  but  the  confused  repre- 
sentation of  things  containing  exclusively  that  which  belongs  to  them  as 
things  in  themselves,  and  this  under  an  accumulation  of  characteristic 
marks  and  partial  representations  which  we  cannot  distinguish  in  con- 
sciousness, is  a  falsification  of  the  conception  of  sensibility  and  phe- 
nominization,  which  renders  our  whole  doctrine  thereof  empty  and 
useless.  The  difference  between  a  confused  and  clear  representation  is 
merely  logical,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with  content. 


Up  to  the  present  time  Kant's  propositions  have  remained  in 
the  very  form  that  he  left  them.  Despite  the  multiplicity  of  new 
philosophical  systems  which  appeared  during  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, and  despite  the  number  of  philosophers  who  have  particu- 
larly studied,  commented  upon,  and  interpreted  Kant's  writings 
Kant's  principal  propositions  have  remained  quite  undeveloped 
primarily  because  most  people  do  not  know  how  to  read  Kant  at 
all,  and  they  therefore  dwell  upon  the  unimportant  and  non- 
essential, ignoring  the  substance. 

Yet  really  Kant  only  just  put  the  question,  threw  to  the  world 
the  problem,  demanding  the  solution  but  not  pointing  the  way 
toward  it. 

This  fact  is  usually  omitted  when  speaking  of  Kant.  He  pro- 
pounded the  riddle,  but  did  not  give  the  solution  of  it. 

And  to  the  present  day  we  repeat  Kant's  propositions,  we  con- 
sider them  incontrovertible,  but  in  the  main  we  represent  them 
to  our  understanding  very  badly,  and  they  are  not  correlated  with 
other  departments  of  our  knowledge.  All  our  positive  science — 
physics  (with  chemistry)  and  biology — is  built  upon  hypotheses 
contradictory  to  Kant's  propositions. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  9 

Moreover,  we  do  not  realize  how  we  ourselves  impose  upon  the 
world  the  properties  of  space,  i.  е.,  extension;  nor  do  we  realize 
how  the  world — earth,  sea,  trees,  men — cannot  possess  such  ex- 
tension. 

We  do  not  understand  how  we  can  see  and  measure  that  exten- 
sion if  it  does  not  exist — nor  what  the  world  represents  in  itself,  if 
it  does  not  possess  extension. 

But  does  the  world  really  exist? — Or,  as  a  logical  conclusion 
from  Kant's  ideas,  shall  we  recognize  the  validity  of  Berkeley's 
idea,  and  deny  the  existence  of  the  world  itself  except  in  imagina- 
tion? 

Positive  philosophy  stands  in  a  very  ambiguous  relation  to 
Kant's  views.  It  accepts  them  and  it  does  not  accept  them:  it  ac- 
cepts, and  considers  them  correct  in  their  relation  to  the  direct 
experience  of  the  organs  of  sense — what  we  see,  hear,  touch.  That 
is,  positive  philosophy  recognizes  the  subjectivity  of  our  recep- 
tivity, and  recognizes  everything  that  we  perceive  in  objects  as 
imposed  upon  them  by  ourselves — but  this  in  relation  to  the  di- 
rect experience  of  the  senses  only. 

When  it  concerns  itself  with  "scientific  experience"  however,  in 
which  precise  instruments  and  calculations  are  used,  positive 
philosophy  evidently  considers  Kant's  view  in  relation  to  that 
invalid,  assuming  that  "scientific  experience"  makes  known  to  us 
the  very  substance  of  things,  the  true  causes  of  our  sensations — or 
if  it  does  not  do  so  now,  it  brings  us  closer  to  the  truth  of  things, 
and  can  inform  us  later. 

Such  dualism  in  the  fundamental  ideas  of  knowledge  moves  the 
physicist,  for  example,  to  recognize  the  subjectivity  of  those  color 
impressions  by  which  we  perceive  the  world  by  means  of  the  eye — 
i.  е.,  sensuously — at  the  same  time  that  he  attributes  a  real  ex- 
istence to  the  vibrations  of  the  ether,  and  calculates  the  number 
of  vibrations  corresponding  to  this  or  that  color.  The  fact  of  eth- 
eric  vibrations — a  definite  number  of  vibrations  for  every  €0101* — 
seems  to  him  as  established  quite  independently  of  the  sensuous 
receptivity  of  colors  by  means  of  the  eye,  its  affiliated  nerves,  and 
so  on.  Consequently,  green  light,  as  it  is  perceived  by  the  eye,  is 
regarded  as  subjective,  i.  е.,  as  the  product  of  a  perceiving  person; 
but  the  very  same  green  light,  investigated  by  the  physicist,  who 
calculates  the  number  of  etheric  vibrations  corresponding  to  green 


10  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

light,  is  considered  as  existing  really  and  objectively.  The  physi- 
cist is  sure  that  a  certain  number  of  etheric  vibrations  produces 
the  subjective  sensation  of  the  color  green,  and  is  entirely  unwill- 
ing to  allow  that  the  sole  reality  in  all  this  concatenation  is  that 
very  subjective  sensation  of  green  color,  and  that  the  definition  of 
green  as  an  etheric  vibration  is  nothing  less  than  the  solution  of  an 
equation  containing  two  unknown  quantities:  color,  and  green, 
with  the  help  of  two  other  unknown  quantities:  ether,  and  vibra- 
tion. By  such  a  method,  of  course,  it  is  easliy  possible  to  solve  any 
equation  whatsoever:  but  the  method  can  only  be  called  a  change 
of  variables.  All  "positivism"  is  in  substance  the  substitution  of 
one  set  of  variables  by  another. 

Nevertheless,  contrary  to  Kant,  the  positivists  are  sure  that 
"more  clear  knowledge  of  phenomena  makes  them  acquainted 
with  things-in-themselves. ' '  They  think  that  looking  upon  phys- 
ical phenomena  as  the  motions  of  the  ether,  or  electrons,  and  cal- 
culating their  motions,  they  begin  to  know  the  very  substance  of 
things;  that  is,  they  believe  exactly  in  the  possibility  of  what  Kant 
denied — the  comprehension  of  the  true  substance  of  things  by 
means  of  the  investigation  of  phenomena.  Moreover  many 
physicists  do  not  consider  it  necessary  even  to  know  Kant;  and 
they  could  not  themselves  exactly  define  in  what  relation  they 
stand  toward  him.  Of  course  it  is  possible  not  to  know  Kant,  but 
it  is  impossible  to  controvert  him.  Every  description  of  physical 
phenomena,  by  its  every  word,  is  related  to  the  problems  set  forth 
by  Kant — remains  in  this  or  that  relation  to  them. 

For  to  accept  the  theory  of  etheric  vibration,  or  the  activity  of 
electrons,  it  is  necessary  to  recognize  space  and  time  as  existing 
outside  of  us,  to  recognize  them  as  real  properties  of  the  world  and 
not  alone  as  properties  of  our  sensuous  receptivity;  to  assume  that 
space  and  time  are  not  imposed  upon  the  world  by  us,  but  are  per- 
ceived by  us  from  without  as  something  inherent  in  the  world. 

In  general,  the  position  of  "science"  in  regard  to  this  question 
of  "subjectively  imposed"  or  "objectively  cognized"  is  more  than 
tottering,  and  in  order  to  form  its  conclusions  "science"  is  forced 
to  accept  many  purely  hypothetical  suppositions  as  things  known 
— as  indubitable  data,  not  demanding  proof. 

This  fact  is  usually  lost  sight  of,  and  the  definition  of  physical 
phenomena  as  the  vibrations  of  the  ether,  or  the  development  of 
electronic  energy,  has  come  into  such  universal  use  that  we  count 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  11 

it  almost  as  a  fact,  and  we  forget  that  everything  is  just  hypothesis 
all  the  way  through.  We  are  so  used  to  the  "ether"  and  its  "vibra- 
tions" or  oscillations;  to  "electrons"  and  their  energy,  that  we 
cannot  dispense  with  them,  and  even  forget  to  examine  into  the 
relation  these  hypotheses  bear  to  the  problem  of  space  and  time  as 
set  forth  by  Kant.  We  are  simply  "not  thinking"  that  one  ex- 
cludes the  other,  and  that  these  hypotheses— i.  е.,  hypotheses  of 
the  "ether"  or  electrons — and  Kant's  hypothesis  are  impossible 
when  taken  in  conjunction. 

Moreover,  physicists  forget  one  very  significant  fact:  in  his 
book,   "Analysis  of  Sensations"    Mach  says: 

In  the  investigation  of  purely  physical  processes  we  generally  employ 
concepts  of  so  abstract  a  character  that  as  a  rule  we  think  only  cursorily, 
or  not  at  all,  of  the  sensations  (elements)  that  lie  at  their  base.  .  . 
The  foundation  of  all  purely  physical  operations  is  based  upon  an  almost 
unending  series  of  sensations,  particularly  if  we  take  into  consideration 
the  adjustment  of  the  apparatus  which  must  precede  the  actual  experi- 
ment. Now  it  can  easily  happen  to  the  physicist  who  does  not  study 
the  psychology  of  his  operations,  that  he  does  not  (to  reverse  a  well-known 
saying)  see  the  trees  for  the  wood,  that  he  overlooks  the  sensory  ele- 
ment at  the  foundation  of  his  work.  .  .  Psychological  analysis  has 
taught  us  that  this  is  not  surprising,  since  the  physicist  is  always  oper- 
ating with  sensations.* 

Mach  here  calls  attention  to  a  very  important  thing.  Physi- 
cists do  not  consider  it  necessary  to  know  psychology  and  to  deal 
with  it  in  their  conclusions. 

But  when  they  know  psychology  and  take  it  into  consideration, 
then  they  hold  the  most  fantastic  duality  of  opinion,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  man  of  orthodox  belief  who  tries  to  reconcile  the  dogmas  of 
faith  with  the  arguments  of  reason,  and  who  is  obliged  to  believe 
simultaneously  in  the  creation  of  the  world  in  seven  days,  seven 
thousand  years  ago,  and  in  geological  periods  hundreds  of  thous- 
ands of  years  long,  and  in  the  evolutionary  theory.  He  is  thus 
forced  to  resort  to  sophisms,  and  demonstrate  that  by  seven  days 
is  meant  seven  periods.  But  why  seven,  exactly,  he  is  unable  to 
explain.  For  physicists  the  role  of  the  "creation  of  the  world"  is 
played  by  the  atomic  theory  and  the  ether,  with  its  wave-like  vi- 
brations, and  further  by  the  electrons,  and  the  energetic,  or 
electro-magnetic  theory  of  the  world. 

Or  sometimes  it  is  even  worse,  for  the  physicist  in  the  depth  of 
his  soul  knows  where  the  truth  lies — knows  what  all  atomic  and 

♦Open  Court  Publishing  Co's  edition  of  Mach'a  work.     1914,  pages  41,  42,  and  43. 


12  ТЛЖТШМ  ORGANUM 

energetic  theories  are  worth  in  reality,  but  fears  to  hang  in  the  air, 
as  it  were;  to  take  refuge  in  mere  negation.  He  has  no  definite 
system  in  place  of  that  whose  falsity  he  already  knows;  he  is  afraid 
to  make  a  plunge  into  mere  emptiness.  Lacking  sufficient  cour- 
age to  declare  that  he  believes  in  nothing  at  all,  he  accoutres  himself 
in  all  materialistic  theories,  as  in  an  official  uniform,  only  because 
with  this  uniform  are  bound  up  certain  rights  and  priveleges,  outer 
as  well  as  inner,  consisting  of  a  certain  confidence  in  himself  and  in 
his  surroundings,  to  forego  which  he  has  no  strength  and  deter- 
mination. The  "unbelieving  materialist" — this  is  the  tragic  fig- 
ure of  our  times,  analogous  to  the  "atheist"  or  "unbelieving 
priest"  of  the  times  of  Voltaire. 

Out  of  this  abhorrence  of  a  vacuum  come  all  dualistic  theories 
which  recognize  "spirit"  and  "matter"  existing  simultaneously 
and  independently  of  one  another. 

In  general,  to  a  disinterested  observer,  the  state  of  our  con- 
temporary science  should  be  of  great  psychological  interest.  In 
all  branches  of  scientific  knowledge  we  are  absorbing  an  enormous 
number  of  facts  destructive  of  the  harmony  of  existing  systems. 
And  these  systems  can  maintain  themselves  only  by  reason  of  the 
heroic  attempts  of  scientific  men  who  are  trying  to  close  their  eyes 
to  a  long  series  of  new  facts  which  threatens  to  submerge  every- 
thing in  an  irresistible  stream.  If  in  reality  we  were  to  collect 
these  system-destroying  facts  they  would  be  so  numerous  in  every 
department  of  knowledge  as  to  exceed  those  upon  which  existing 
systems  are  founded.  The  systematization  of  that  which  we  do  not 
know  may  yield  us  more  for  the  true  understanding  of  the  world 
and  the  self  than  the  systematization  of  that  which  in  the  opinion 
of  "exact  science"  we  do  know. 


CHAPTER  II 

\  new  view  of  the  Kantian  problem.  The  Ideas  of  Hinton.  The"space 
Tense"  and  its  evolution.  A  system  for  the  development  of  a  sense 
of  the  fourth  dimension  by  exercises  with  colored  cubes.  The 
lometrkal  conception  of  space.  Three  perpendiculars-why 
thrS  Can  everything  existing  be  measured  by  three  perpendicu- 
ars?  Facts  physical  and  metaphysical.  The  indices  of  existence^ 
Reality  of  ideas.  Insufficient  evidence  of  the  existence  of  matter 
and  motion.  ^  Matter  and  motion  are  only  logical  concepts,  like 
"good"  and  "evil." 

S  already  stated,  Kant  propounded  the  problem,  but 
gave  no  solution  of  it,  nor  did  he  point  the  way  to  a 
solution.     And  not  one  of  the  known  commenta- 
tors, interpreters,  followers  or  adversaries  of  Kant 
has  found  a  solution,  nor  the  way  to  it. 
I  find  the  first  flashes  of  a  right  understanding  of  the  Kantian 
problem,  and  the  first  suggestions  in  regard  to  a  possible  way 
toward  its  solution  in  the  writings  of  С.  H.  Hinton,  author  of  the 
books,  "A  New  Era  of  Thought"  and  "The  Fourth  Dimension. 

These  books  contain  interesting  synopses  of  many  things  pre- 
viously written  about  problems  of  higher  dimensions,  together 
with  ideas  of  the  author's  own  which  have  a  bearing  upon  the  sub- 
ject under  discussion  here.  m 

Hinton  notes  that  in  commenting  upon  Kantian  ideas,  only 
their  negative  side  is  usually  insisted  upon,  namely,  the  fact  that 
we  can  cognize  things  in  a  sensuous  way,  in  terms  of  space 
and  time  only,  is  regarded  as  an  obstacle,  hindering  us  from  seeing 
what  things  in  themselves  really  are,  preventing  the  possibility 
of  cognizing  them  as  they  are,  imposing  upon  them  that  which 
is  not  inherent  in  them,  shutting  them  off  from  us. 

But  [says  Hinton]  if  we  take  Kant's  statement  simply  as  it  is— not 
seeing  in  the  spatial  conception  a  hindrance  to  right  receptivity— that  we 
apprehend  things  by  means  of  space— then  it  is  equally  allowable  to  con- 
sider our  space  sense  not  as  a  negative  condition,  hindering  our  percep- 
tion of  the  world,  but  as  a  positive  means  by  which  the  mind  grasps  its 
experiences,  i.  е.,  by  which  we  cognize  the  world. 


13 


14  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

There  is,  in  so  many  books  in  which  the  subject  is  treated,  a  certain 
air  of  despondency — as  if  this  space  apprehension  were  a  kind  of  veil 
which  shut  us  off  from  nature.  But  there  is  no  need  to  adopt  this  feeling. 
The  first  postulate  of  this  book  is  a  full  recognition  of  the  fact  that  it  is  by 
means  of  space  that  we  apprehend  what  is. 

Space  is  the  instrument  of  the  mind. 

Very  often  a  statement  which  seems  to  be  very  deep  and  abstruse  and 
hard  to  grasp,  is  simply  the  form  into  which  deep  thinkers  have  thrown 
a  very  simple  and  practical  observation.  And  for  the  present  let  us  look 
on  Kant's  great  doctrine  of  space  from  a  practical  point  of  view,  and  it 
comes  to  this — it  is  important  to  develop  the  space  sense,  for  it  is  the 
means  by  which  we  think  about  real  things. 

Now  according  to  Kant  [Hinton  goes  on  to  say]  the  space  sense,  or 
the  intuition  of  space,  is  the  most  fundamental  power  of  the  mind.  But 
I  do  not  find  anywhere  a  systematic  and  thorough-going  education  of 
the  space  sense.  It  is  left  to  be  organized  by  accident.  Yet  the  special 
development  of  the  space  sense  makes  us  acquainted  with  a  whole  series 
of  new  conceptions. 

Fichte,  Schelling,  Hegel,  have  developed  certain  tendencies  and  have 
written  remarkable  books,  but  the  true  successors  of  Kant  are  Gauss  and 
Lobachevsky. 

For  if  our  intuition  of  space  is  the  means  whereby  we  apprehend,  then 
it  follows  that  there  may  be  different  kinds  of  intuitions  of  space.  Who 
can  tell  what  the  absolute  space  intuition  is?  This  intuition  of  space 
must  be  colored,  so  to  speak,  by  the  conditions  (of  psychical  activity)  of 
the  being  which  uses  it. 

By  a  remarkable  analysis  the  great  geometers  above  mentioned  have 
shown  that  space  is  not  limited  as  ordinary  experience  would  seem  to 
inform  us,  but  that  we  are  quite  capable  of  conceiving  different  kinds  of 

P      '  Л  New  Era  of  Thought. 

Hinton  invented  a  complicated  system  for  the  education  and 
development  of  the  space  sense  by  means  of  exercises  with  groups 
of  cubes  of  different  colors.  The  books  above  mentioned  are 
devoted  to  the  exposition  of  this  system.  In  my  opinion  Hinton's 
exercises  are  interesting  from  a  theoretical  standpoint,  but  they 
are  practically  valuable  only  for  such  as  have  the  same  turn  of 
mind  as  Hinton's  own. 

Exercises  of  the  mind  according  to  his  system  must  first  of  all 
lead  to  the  development  of  the  ability  to  imagine  objects,  not  as 
the  eye  sees  them,  i.  е.,  in  perspective,  but  as  they  are  geometric- 
ally— to  learn  to  imagine  the  cube,  for  example,  simultaneously 
from  all  sides.    Moreover,  such  a  development  of  the  imagination 

*  Mr  Ouspensky  does  not  quote  authors  verbatim,  aa  a  rule,  but  sometimes  condenses,  sometimes 
develops  their  thoughts.  A  comparison  of  pp.  2,  3,  and  4  of  Hinton's  book  with  the  quotation  will 
indicate  his  method.     Traml. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  15 

as  overcomes  the  illusions  of  perspective  results  in  the  expansion 
of  the  limits  of  consciousness,  thus  creating  new  conceptions  and 
augmenting  the  faculty  for  perceiving  analogies. 


Kant  established  the  fact  that  the  development  of  knowledge 
under  the  existing  conditions  of  receptivity  will  not  bring  us  any 
closer  to  things  in  themselves.  But  Hinton  asserts  that  it  is  possi- 
ble, if  desired,  to  change  the  very  conditions  of  receptivity,  and 
thus  to  approach  the  true  substance  of  things. 

Our  space  as  we  ordinarily  think  of  it  is  conceived  as  limited — not  in 
extent,  but  in  a  certain  way  which  can  only  be  realized  when  we  think 
of  our  ways  of  measuring  space  objects.  It  is  found  that  there  are  only 
three  independent  directions  in  which  a  body  can  be  measured — it  must 
have  height,  length  and  breadth,  but  it  has  no  more  than  these  dimen- 
sions, if  any  other  measurement  be  taken  in  it,  this  new  measurement 
will  be  found  to  be  compounded  of  the  old  measurements. 

It  is  impossible  to  find  a  point  in  the  body  which  could  not  be  arrived 
at  by  travelling  in  combinations  of  the  three  directions  already  taken. 

But  why  should  space  be  limited  to  three  independent  directions? 

Geometers  have  found  that  there  is  no  reason  why  bodies  which  we 
can  measure  should  be  thus  limited.  As  a  matter  of  fact  all  the  bodies 
which  we  can  measure  are  thus  limited.  So  we  come  to  this  conclusion, 
that  the  space  which  we  use  for  conceiving  ordinary  objects  in  the  world 
is  limited  to  three  dimensions.  But  it  might  be  possible  for  there  to  be 
beings  living  in  a  world  such  that  they  would  conceive  a  space  of  four  dimen- 
sions* 

It  is  possible  to  say  a  great  deal  about  space  of  higher  dimensions  than 
our  own,  and  to  work  out  analytically  many  problems  which  suggest 
themselves.  But  can  we  conceive  four-dimensional  space  in  the  same 
way  in  which  we  can  conceive  our  own  space?  Can  we  think  of  a  body  in 
four  dimensions  as  a  unit  having  properties  in  the  same  way  as  we  think 
of  a  body  having  a  definite  shape  in  the  space  with  which  we  are  familiar? 

There  is  really  no  more  difficulty  in  conceiving  four-dimensional 
shapes,  when  we  go  about  it  in  the  right  way,  than  in  conceiving  the  idea 
of  solid  shapes,  nor  is  there  any  mystery  at  all  about  it. 

When  the  faculty  to  apprehend  in  four  dimensions  is  acquired — or 
rather  when  it  is  brought  into  consciousness,  for  it  exists  in  every- 
one in  imperfect  form — a  new  horizon  opens.  The  mind  acquires  a 
development  of  power,  and  in  this  use  of  ampler  space  as  a  mode  of 
thought,  a  path  is  opened  by  using  that  very  truth  which,  when  first 
stated  by  Kant,  seemed  to  close  the  mind  within  such  fast  limits.  Our 
perception  is  subject  to  the  condition  of  being  in  space.  But  space  is  not 
limited  as  we  at  first  think. 

*  Italics  by  P.  D.  Ouspensky.    Transl. 


16  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

The  next  step  after  having  formed  this  power  of  conception  in  ampler 
space,  is  to  investigate  nature  and  see  what  phenomena  are  to  be  ex- 
plained by  four-dimensional  relations. 

The  thought  of  past  ages  has  used  the  conception  of  a  three-dimensional 
space,  and  by  that  means  has  classified  many  phenomena  and  has  ob- 
tained rules  for  dealing  with  matters  of  great  practical  utility.  The  path 
which  opens  immediately  before  us  in  the  future  is  that  of  applying  the 
conception  of  four-dimensional  space  to  the  phenomena  of  nature,  and 
of  investigating  what  can  be  found  out  by  this  new  means  of  apprehen- 
sion.    .     . 

For  development  of  knowledge  it  is  necessary  to  separate  the  self 
elements,  i.  е.,  the  personal  element  which  we  put  in  everything  cognized 
by  us  from  that  which  is  cognized,  in  order  that  our  attention  may  not  be 
distracted  (upon  ourselves)  from  the  properties  which  we,  in  substance, 
perceive. 

Only  by  getting  rid  of  the  self  elements  in  our  receptivity  do  we  put 
ourselves  in  a  position  in  which  we  can  propound  sensible  questions. 
Only  by  getting  rid  of  the  notion  of  a  circular  motion  of  the  sun  around 
the  earth  (i.  е.,  around  us — self-element)  do  we  prepare  our  way  to  study 
the  sun  as  it  really  is. 

But  the  worst  about  a  self  element  is  that  its  presence  is  never  dreamed 
of  till  it  is  got  rid  of. 

In  order  to  understand  what  the  self  element  in  our  receptivity  means, 
imagine  ourselves  to  be  translated  suddenly  to  another  part  of  the  uni- 
verse, and  to  find  there  intelligent  beings  and  to  hold  conversation  with 
them.  If  we  told  them  that  we  came  from  this  world,  and  were  to 
describe  the  sun  to  them,  saying  that  it  was  a  bright,  hot  body  which 
moved  around  us,  they  would  reply:  "You  have  told  us  something 
about  the  sun,  but  you  have  also  told  us  something  about  yourselves." 

Therefore,  desiring  to  tell  something  about  the  sun,  we  shall  first  of 
all  get  rid  of  the  self  element  which  is  introduced  into  our  knowledge  of 
the  sun  by  the  movement  of  the  earth,  upon  which  we  are,  round  it.    .    . 

One  of  our  serious  pieces  of  work  will  be  to  get  rid  of  the  self  elements 
in  the  knowledge  of  the  arrangement  of  objects. 

The  relations  of  our  universe  or  our  space  with  regard  to  the  wider 
universe  of  four-dimensional  space  are  altogether  undetermined.  The 
real  relationship  will  require  a  great  deal  of  study  to  apprehend,  and 
when  apprehended  will  seem  as  natural  to  us  as  the  position  of  the  earth 
among  the  other  planets  seems  to  us  now. 

I  would  divide  studies  of  arrangement  into  two  classes:  those  which 
create  the  faculty  of  arrangement,  and  those  which  use  it  and  exercise 
it.  Mathematics  exercises  it,  but  I  do  not  think  it  creates  it;  and  un- 
fortunately, in  mathematics  as  it  is  now  often  taught,  the  pupil  is 
launched  into  a  vast  system  of  symbols:  the  whole  use  and  meaning  of 
symbols,  (namely,  as  means  to  acquire  a  clear  grasp  of  facts)  is  lost  to 
him.     .     . 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  17 

Of  the  possible  units  which  will  serve  for  the  study  of  arrangement,  I 
take  the  cube;  and  I  have  found  that  whenever  I  took  any  other  unit  I 
got  wrong,  puzzled,  and  lost  my  way.  With  the  cube  one  does  not  get 
along  very  fast,  but  everything  is  perfectly  obvious  and  simple,  and 
builds  up  into  a  whole  of  which  every  part  is  evident.     .     . 

Our  work  then  will  be  this:  a  study,  by  means  of  cubes,  of  the  facts  of 
arrangement;  and  the  process  of  learning  will  be  an  active  one  of  actually 
putting  up  the  cubes.  Thus  we  will  bring  our  minds  into  contact 
with  nature.*  A  Ney)  Em  of  Thought 


I  shall  return  again  to  Hinton's  books  several  times,  but  mean- 
while it  is  necessary  to  establish  our  relation  to  the  ideas  which 
Kant's  problem  touches. 

What  is  space? 

Taken  as  object,  that  is,  perceived  by  our  consciousness,  space 
is  for  us  the  form  of  the  universe  or  the  form  of  the  matter  in  the 
universe. 

Space  possesses  an  infinite  extension  in  all  directions.  But  it 
can  be  measured  in  only  three  directions  independent  of  one 
another;  in  length,  breadth,  and  height;  these  directions  we  call 
the  dimensions  of  space,  and  we  say  that  our  space  has  three 
dimensions:  it  is  three-dimensional. 

By  independent  direction  we  mean  in  this  case  a  line  at  right 
angles  to  another  line. 

Our  geometry,  (or  the  science  of  measurement  of  the  earth,  or 
matter  in  space)  knows  only  three  such  lines,  which  are  mutually 
at  right  angles  to  one  another  and  not  parallel  among  them- 
selves. 

Should  we  mean  by  independent  direction  the  line  which  is  not 
at  right  angles,  i.  е.,  which  does  not  form  with  the  others  an  angle 
of  90  degrees,  but  an  angle,  say,  of  30  degrees,  then  we  would 
have  the  number  of  dimensions  not  three,  but  nine. 

It  is  seen  from  this  that  the  three-dimensionality  of  our  space  is 
simply  a  geometrical  condition,  and  depends  upon  the  fact  that 
we  are  using  right  angles  as  a  unit  of  measurement. 

But  at  the  same  time,  in  our  space  and  our  universe  we  know 
only  three  perpendiculars,  i.  е.,  only  three  independent  right 
angles. 

But  why  three  only,  and  not  ten  or  fifteen? 

This  we  do  not  know. 

*  The  entire  quotation  ia  compiled  by  Mr.  Ouspensky,  conveying  Hinton's  ideas  and  omitting  all 
non-essentials.     Transl. 


18  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

And  here  is  another  very  significant  fact:  either  because  of  some 
mysterious  property  of  the  universe,  or  because  of  some  mental 
limitation,  we  cannot  even  imagine  to  ourselves  more  than  three 
independent  directions. 

But  we  speak  of  the  universe  as  infinite,  and  because  the  first 
condition  of  infinity  is  infinity  in  all  directions  and  in  all  possible 
relations,  so  we  must  presuppose  in  space  an  infinite  number  of 
dimensions:  that  is,  we  must  presuppose  an  infinite  number  of 
lines  perpendicular  and  not  parallel  to  each  other :  and  yet  out  of 
these  lines  we  know,  for  some  reason,  only  three. 

It  is  usually  in  some  such  guise  that  the  question  of  higher 
dimensionality  appears  to  normal  human  consciousness. 

Since  we  cannot  construct  more  than  three  mutually  inde- 
pendent perpendiculars,  and  if  the  three-dimensionality  of  our 
space  is  conditional  upon  this,  we  are  forced  to  admit  the  indubit- 
able fact  of  the  limitedness  of  our  space  in  relation  to  geometrical 
possibilities :  though  of  course  if  the  properties  of  space  are  created 
by  some  limitation  of  consciousness,  then  the  limitedness  lies  in 
ourselves. 

No  matter  what  this  limitedness  depends  on,  it  is  a  fact  that  it 
exists. 

A  given  point  can  be  the  vertex  of  only  eight  independent 
tetrahedrons.  Through  a  given  point  it  is  possible  to  draw  only 
three  perpendicular  and  not  parallel  straight  lines. 

Upon  this  as  a  basis,  we  define  the  dimensionality  of  space  by 
the  number  of  lines  it  is  possible  to  draw  in  it  which  are  mutually 
at  right  angles  one  with  another. 

The  line  upon  which  there  cannot  be  a  perpendicular,  that  is, 
another  line,  constitutes  linear,  or  one-dimensional  space. 

Upon  the  surface  two  perpendiculars  are  possible.  This  is 
superficial,  or  two-dimensional  space. 

In  "space"  three  perpendiculars  are  possible.  This  is  solid,  or 
three-dimensional  space. 

The  idea  of  the  fourth  dimension  arose  from  the  assumption 
that  in  addition  to  the  three  dimensions  known  to  our  geometry 
there  exists  still  a  fourth,  for  some  reason  unknown  and  inaccessi- 
ble to  us,  i.  е.,  that  in  addition  to  the  three  known  to  us,  a  mys- 
terious fourth  perpendicular  is  possible. 

This  assumption  is  practically  founded  on  the  consideration 
that  there  are  things  and  phenomena  in  the  world  undoubtedly 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  19 

really  existing,  but  quite  incommensurable  in  terms  of  length, 
breadth  and  thickness,  and  lying  as  it  were  outside  of  three- 
dimensional  space. 

By  really  existing  we  understand  that  which  produces  definite 
action,  which  possesses  certain  functions,  which  appears  to  be  the 
cause  of  something  else. 

That  which  does  not  exist  cannot  produce  any  action,  has  no 
function,  cannot  be  a  cause. 

But  there  are  different  modes  of  existence.  There  is  physical 
existence,  recognized  by  certain  sorts  of  actions  and  functions, 
and  there  is  metaphysical  existence,  recognized  by  its  actions 
and  its  functions. 

A  house  exists,  and  the  idea  of  good  and  evil  exists.  But  they 
do  not  exist  in  like  manner.  One  and  the  same  method  of  proof  of 
existence  does  not  suffice  for  the  proof  of  the  existence  of  a  house 
and  for  the  proof  of  the  existence  of  an  idea.  A  house  is  a  physical 
fact,  an  idea  is  a  metaphysical  fact.  Physical  and  metaphysical 
facts  exist,  but  they  exist  differently. 

In  order  to  prove  the  idea  of  a  divison  into  good  and  evil,  i.  е., 
a  metaphysical  fact,  I  have  only  to  prove  its  possibility.  This 
is  already  sufficiently  established.  But  if  I  should  prove  that  a 
house,  i.  е.,  a  physical  fact,  may  exist,  it  does  not  at  all  mean  that 
it  exists  really.  If  I  prove  that  a  man  may  own  the  house  it  is  no 
proof  that  he  owns  it. 

Our  relation  to  an  idea  and  to  a  house  are  quite  different.  It  is 
possible  by  a  certain  effort  to  destroy  a  house — to  burn,  to  wreck 
it.  The  house  will  cease  to  exist.  But  suppose  you  attempt  to 
destroy,  by  an  effort,  an  idea.  The  more  you  try  to  contest,  argue, 
refute,  ridicule,  the  more  the  idea  is  likely  to  spread,  grow, 
strengthen.  And  contrary  wise,  silence,  oblivion,  non-action,  "  non- 
resistance"  will  exterminate,  or  in  any  case  will  weaken  the  idea. 
Silence,  oblivion,  will  not  wreck  a  house,  will  not  hurt  a  stone. 
It  is  clear  that  the  existence  of  a  house  and  that  of  an  idea  are 
quite  different  existences. 

Of  such  different  existences  we  know  very  many.  A  book  exists, 
and  also  the  contents  of  a  book.  Notes  exist,  and  so  does  the  music 
that  the  notes  combine  to  make.  A  coin  exists,  and  so  does  the  pur- 
chasing value  of  a  coin.  A  word  exists,  and  the  energy  which  it 
contains. 


20  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

We  discern  on  the  one  hand,  a  whole  series  of  physical  facts,  and 
on  the  other  hand,  a  series  of  metaphysical  facts. 

As  facts  of  the  first  kind  exist,  so  also  do  facts  of  the  second 
kind  exist,  but  differently. 

From  the  usual  positivist  point  of  view  it  will  seem  naive  in  the 
highest  degree  to  speak  of  the  purchasing  value  of  a  coin  separately 
from  the  coin:  of  the  energy  of  a  word  separately  from  the  word: 
of  the  contents  of  a  booh  separately  from  the  book,  and  so 
on.  We  all  know  that  these  are  only  "what  people  say," 
that  in  reality  purchasing  value,  energy  of  a  word,  and  contents  of  a 
book  do  not  exist,  that  by  these  conceptions  we  only  denote  a  series 
of  phenomena  in  some  way  linked  with  coin,  word,  book,  but  in 
substance  quite  separate  from  them. 

But  is  it  so? 

We  decided  to  accept  nothing  as  given,  consequently  we  shall 
not  negate  anything  as  given. 

We  see  in  things,  in  addition  to  what  is  external,  something  in- 
ternal. We  know  that  this  internal  element  in  things  constitutes 
a  continuous  part  of  things,  usually  their  principal  substance.  And 
quite  naturally  we  ask  ourselves,  where  is  this  internal  element, 
and  what  does  it  represent  in  and  by  itself.  We  see  that  it  is  not 
embraced  within  our  space.  We  begin  to  conceive  of  the  idea  of  a 
"higher  space"  possessing  more  dimensions  than  ours.  Our  space 
then  appears  to  be  somehow  a  part  of  higher  space,  i.  е.,  we  begin 
to  believe  that  we  know,  feel,  and  measure  only  part  of  space,  that 
part  which  is  measureable  in  terms  of  length,  width  and  height. 


As  was  said  before,  we  usually  regard  space  as  a  form  of  the 
universe,  or  as  a  form  of  the  matter  of  the  universe.  To  make  this 
clear  it  is  possible  to  say  that  a  "cube"  is  the  form  of  the  matter 
in  a  cube;  a  "sphere"  is  the  form  of  the  matter  in  a  sphere; 
"space" — an  infinite  sphere — is  the  form  of  the  entire  matter  of 
the  universe. 

H.  P.  Blavatsky,  in  "The  Secret  Doctrine"  has  this  to  say 
about  space: 

The  superficial  absurdity  of  assuming  that  Space  itself  is  measurable 
in  any  direction  is  of  little  consequence.  The  familiar  phrase  (the 
fourth  dimension  of  space)  can  only  be  an  abbreviation  of  the  fuller 
form— the  "Fourth  dimension  of  Matter  in  Space"     .     .     The  progress 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  21 

of  evolution  may  be  destined  to  introduce  us  to  new  characteristics  of 
matter.     .     ."  * 

But  the  formula  defining  "space"  as  "the  form  of  matter  in  the 
universe"  suffers  from  this  deficiency,  that  there  is  introduced  in 
it  the  concept  of  "matter,"  i.  е.,  the  unknown. 

I  have  already  spoken  of  that  "dead  end  siding,"  x  =y,  у  =x,  to 
which  all  attempts  at  the  physical  definition  of  matter  inevitably 
lead. 

Psychological  definitions  lead  to  the  same  thing. 

In  a  well  known  book,  "The  Physiology  of  the  Soul,"  A.  I. 
Gerzen  says: 

We  call  matter  everything  which  directly  or  indirectly  offers  resist- 
ance to  motion,  directly  or  indirectly  produced  by  us,  manifesting  a 
remarkable  analogy  with  our  passive  states. 

And  we  call  force  (motion)  that  which  directly  or  indirectly  com- 
municates movement  to  us  or  to  other  bodies,  thus  manifesting  the 
greatest  similitude  to  our  active  states. 

Consequently,  "matter"  and  "motion"  are  something  like  pro- 
jections of  our  active  and  passive  states.  It  is  clear  that  it  is 
possible  to  define  the  passive  state  only  in  terms  of  the  active, 
and  the  active  in  terms  of  the  passive — again  two  unknowns,  de- 
fining one  another. 

E.  Douglas  Fawcett,  in  an  article  entitled  "Idealism  and  the 
Problem  of  Nature"  in  "The  Quest"  (April,  1910),  discusses 
matter  from  this  point  of  view. 

Matter  (like  force)  does  not  give  us  any  trouble.  We  know  all  about 
it,  for  the  very  good  reason  that  we  invented  it.  By  "matter"  we  think  of 
sensuous  objects.  It  is  mental  change  of  concrete,  but  too  complicated 
facts,  which  are  difficult  to  deal  with. 

Strictly  speaking,  matter  exists  only  as  a  concept.  Truth  to  tell,  the 
character  of  matter,  even  when  treated  only  as  a  conception,  is  so  un- 
obvious  that  the  majority  of  persons  are  unable  to  tell  us  exactly  what 
they  mean  by  it. 

An  important  fact  is  here  brought  to  light :  matter  and  force  are 
just  logical  concepts,  i.  е.,  only  words  accepted  for  the  designation 
of  a  lengthy  series  of  complicated  facts.  It  is  difficult  for  us,  edu- 
cated almost  exclusively  along  physical  lines,  to  understand  this 
clearly,  but  in  substance  it  may  be  stated  as  follows:  Who  has 
seen  matter  and  force,  and  when?  We  see  things,  see  phenomena. 
Matter,  independently  of  the  substance  from  which  a  given  thing 
is  made,  or  of  which  it  consists,  we  have  never  seen  and  never 

*  "The  Secret  Doctrine,"  The  Theosophical  Publishing  Society.    Third  Edition,  p.  271,  vol.  I. 


22  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

will  see;  but  the  given  substance  is  not  quite  matter,  this  is  wood, 
or  iron  or  stone.  Similarly,  we  shall  never  see  force  separately 
from  motion.  What  does  this  mean?  It  means  that  "matter" 
and  "force"  are  just  such  abstract  conceptions,  as  "value"  or 
"labor,"  as  "the  purchasing  value  of  a  coin"  or  the  "contents" 
of  a  book;  it  means  that  matter  is  "such  stuff  as  dreams  are  made 
of."  And  because  we  can  never  touch  this  "stuff"  and  can  see  it 
only  in  dreams,  so  we  can  never  touch  physical  matter,  nor  see, 
nor  hear,  nor  photograph  it,  separately  from  the  object.  We  cognize 
things  and  phenomena  which  are  bad  or  good,  but  we  never 
cognize  "matter"  and  "force"  separately  from  things  and  phe- 
nomena. 

Matter  is  as  much  an  abstract  conception  as  are  truth,  good  and 
evil. 

It  is  as  impossible  to  put  matter  or  any  part  of  matter  into  a 
chemical  retort  or  crucible  as  it  is  impossible  to  sell  "Egyptian 
darkness"  in  vials.  However  as  it  is  said  that  "Egyptian  darkness" 
is  sold  as  a  black  powder  in  Athos,  therefore  perhaps  even  matter, 
somewhere,  by  some  one,  has  been  seen.* 

In  order  to  discuss  questions  of  this  order  a  certain  preparation 
is  necessary,  or  a  high  degree  of  intuition;  but  unfortunately  it  is 
customary  to  consider  fundamental  questions  of  cosmogony  very 
lightly. 

A  man  easily  admits  his  incompetency  in  music,  dancing,  or 
higher  mathematics,  but  he  always  maintains  the  privilege  of 
having  an  opinion  and  being  a  judge  of  questions  relating  to  "first 
principles." 

It  is  difficult   to  discuss  with  such  men. 

For  how  will  you  answer  a  man  who  looks  at  you  in  perplexity, 
knocks  on  the  table  with  his  finger  and  says,  "  This  is  matter.  I 
know  it ;  feel !  How  can  it  be  an  abstract  conception  ?  "  To  answer 
this  is  as  difficult  as  to  answer  the  man  who  says:  "I  see  that  the 
sun  rises  and  sets!" 

Returning  to  the  consideration  of  space,  we  shall  under  no  cir- 
cumstances introduce  unknown  quantities  in  the  definition  of  it. 
We  shall  define  it  only  in  terms  of  those  two  data  which  we  decided 
to  accept  at  the  very  beginning. 

The  world  and  consciousness  are  the  facts  which  we  decided  to 
recognize  as  existing. 

*  This  is  irony  which  the  English  speaking  may  easily  fail  to  understand.  Some  unscrupulous 
monks  of  the  monastery  of  Athos,  famous  throughout  Greece  and  Russia,  made  a  practice,  it  is  said, 
of  selling  "Egyptian  darkness"  in  little  vials,  thus  making  capital  out  of  the  credulity  and  piety  of  the 
illiterate  Russian  pilgrims  who  were  wont  to  visit  this  monastery  in  great  numbers.    Transl. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  23 

By  the  world  we  mean  the  combination  of  unknown  causes  of 
our  sensations. 

By  the  material  world  we  mean  the  combination  of  unknown 
causes  of  a  definite  series  of  sensations,  those  of  sight,  hearing, 
touch,  smell,  taste,  sensations  of  weight,  and  so  on. 

Space  is  either  a  property  of  the  world  or  a  property  of  our 
knowledge  of  the  world. 

Three-dimensional  space  is  either  a  property  of  the  material 
world  or  a  property  of  our  receptivity  of  the  material  world. 

Our  inquiry  is  confined  to  the  problem :  how  shall  we  approach 
the  study  of  space? 


CHAPTER  III 

What  may  we  learn  about  the  fourth  dimension  by  a  study  of  the  geo- 
metrical relations  within  our  space?  What  should  be  the  relation 
between  a  three-dimensional  body  and  one  of  four  dimensions  ?  The 
four-dimensional  body  as  the  tracing  of  the  movement  of  a  three- 
dimensional  body  in  the  direction  which  is  not  confined  within  it. 
A  four-dimensional  body  as  containing  an  infinite  number  of  three- 
dimensional  bodies.  A  three-dimensional  body  as  a  section  of  a  four- 
dimensional  one.  Parts  of  bodies  and  entire  bodies  in  three  and  in 
four  dimensions.  The  incommensurability  of  a  three-dimensional 
and  a  four-dimensional  body.  A  material  atom  as  a  section  of  a 
four-dimensional  line. 

|N  another  of  his  books,  "The  Fourth  Dimension,"  Hinton 
makes  an  interesting  remark  about  the  method  by  which 
we  may  approach  the  question  of  the  higher  dimensions. 
This  is  what  he  says : 

Our  space  itself  bears  within  it   relations  through  which  we 
can  establish  relations  to  other  (higher)  spaces. 

For  within  space  are  given  the  conception  of  point  and  line,  line  and 
plane,  which  really  involve  the  relation  of  space  to  a  higher  space. 

If  we  concentrate  upon  this  thought,  and  consider  the  very 
great  difference  between  the  point  and  the  line,  between  the  line 
and  the  surface,  surface  and  solid,  we  shall  indeed  come  to  under- 
stand how  much  of  the  new  and  inconceivable  the  fourth  dimen- 
sion holds  for  us. 

As  in  the  point  it  is  impossible  to  imagine  the  line  and  the 
laws  of  the  line;  as  in  the  line  it  is  impossible  to  imagine  the  sur- 
face and  the  laws  of  the  surface;  as  in  the  surface  it  is  impossible 
to  imagine  the  solid  and  the  laws  of  the  solid,  so  in  our  space 
it  is  impossible  to  imagine  the  body  having  more  than  three 
dimensions,  and  impossible  to  understand  the  laws  of  the  exist- 
ence of  such  a  body. 

But  studying  the  mutual  relations  between  the  point,  the  line, 
the  surface,  the  solid,  we  begin  to  learn  something  about  the 
fourth  dimension,  i.  е.,  of  four-dimensional  space.    We  begin  to 

25 


26  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

learn  what  it  can  be  in  comparison  with  our  three-dimensional 
space,  and  what  it  cannot  be. 

This  last  we  learn  first  of  all.  And  it  is  especially  important, 
because  it  saves  us  from  many  deeply  inculcated  illusions,  which 
are  very  detrimental  to  right  knowledge. 

We  learn  what  cannot  be  in  four-dimensional  space,  and  this 
permits  us  to  set  forth  what  can  be  there. 

Let  us  consider  these  relations  within  our  space,  and  let  us  see 
what  conclusions  we  can  derive  from  their  investigation. 

We  know  that  our  geometry  regards  the  line  as  a  tracing  of  the 
movement  of  a  point;  the  surface  as  a  tracing  of  the  movement 
of  a  line;  and  the  solid  as  a  tracing  of  the  movement  of  a  surface. 
On  these  premises  we  put  to  ourselves  this  question:  Is  it  not 
possible  to  regard  the  "four-dimensional  body"  as  a  tracing  of  the 
movement  of  a  three-dimensional  one? 

But  what  is  this  movement,  and  in  what  direction? 

The  point,  moving  in  space,  and  leaving  the  tracing  of  its  move- 
ment, a  line,  moves  in  a  direction  not  contained  in  it,  because  in  a 
point  there  is  no  direction  whatsoever. 

The  line,  moving  in  space,  and  leaving  the  tracing  of  its  move- 
ment, the  surface,  moves  in  a  direction  not  contained  in  it  because, 
moving  in  a  direction  contained  in  it,  a  line  will  continue  to  be  a 
line. 

The  surface,  moving  in  space,  and  leaving  a  tracing  of  its  move- 
ment, the  solid,  moves  also  in  a  direction  not  contained  in  it.  If 
it  should  move  otherwise,  it  would  remain  always  the  surface.  In 
order  to  leave  a  tracing  of  itself  as  a  "solid,"  or  three-dimensional 
figure,  it  must  set  off  from  itself,  move  in  a  direction  which  in  itself 
it  has  not. 

In  analogy  with  all  this,  the  solid,  in  order  to  leave  as  the 
tracing  of  its  movement,  the  four-dimensional  figure  (hypersolid) 
shall  move  in  a  direction  not  confined  in  it;  or  in  other  words  it 
shall  come  out  of  itself,  set  off  from  itself,  move  in  a  direction  which 
is  not  present  in  it.  Later  on  it  will  be  shown  in  what  manner  we 
shall  understand  this. 

But  for  the  present  we  can  say  that  the  direction  of  the  move- 
ment in  the  fourth  dimension  lies  out  of  all  those  directions  which 
are  possible  in  a  three-dimensional  figure. 

We  consider  the  line  as  an  infinite  number  of  points;  the  surface  as 
an  infinite  number  of  lines;  the  solid  as  an  infinite  number  of  surfaces. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  27 

In  analogy  with  this  it  is  possible  to  consider  that  it  is  necessary 
to  regard  a  four-dimensional  body  as  an  infinite  number  of  three- 
dimensional  ones,  and  four-dimensional  space  as  an  infinite  num- 
ber of  three-dimensional  spaces. 

Moreover,  we  know  that  the  line  is  limited  by  points,  that  the 
surface  is  limited  by  lines,  that  the  solid  is  limited  by  surfaces. 

It  is  possible  that  a  four-dimensional  body  is  limited  by  three- 
dimensional  bodies. 

Or  it  is  possible  to  say  that  the  line  is  a  distance  between  two 
points;  the  surface  a  distance  between  two  lines;  the  solid — be- 
tween two  surfaces. 

Or  again,  that  the  line  separates  two  points  or  several  points  from 
one  another  (for  the  straight  line  is  the  shortest  distance  between 
two  points) ;  that  the  surface  separates  two  or  several  lines  from  each 
other;  that  the  solid  separates  several  surfaces  one  from  another; 
so  the  cube  separates  six  flat  surfaces  one  from  another — its  faces. 

The  line  binds  several  separate  points  into  a  certain  whole  (the 
straight,  the  curved,  the  broken  line) ;  the  surface  binds  several 
lines  into  something  whole  (the  quadrilateral,  the  triangle);  the 
solid  binds  several  surfaces  into  something  whole  (the  cube,  the 
pyramid) . 

,  It  is  possible  that  four-dimensional  space  is  the  distance  between  a 
group  of  solids,  separating  these  solids,  yet  at  the  same  time  binding 
them  into  some  to  us  inconceivable  whole,  even  though  they  seem  to  be 
separate  from  one  another. 

Moreover,  we  regard  the  point  as  a  section  of  a  line;  the  line  as  a 
section  of  a  surface;  the  surface  as  a  section  of  a  solid. 

By  analogy,  it  is  possible  to  regard  the  solid  (the  cube,  sphere, 
pyramid)  as  a  section  of  a  four-dimensional  body,  and  our  entire 
three-dimensional  space  as  a  section  of  a  four-dimensional  space. 

If  every  three-dimensional  body  is  the  section  of  a  four-  dimen- 
sional one,  then  every  point  of  a  three-dimensional  body  is  the 
section  of  a  four-dimensional  line.  It  is  possible  to  regard  an 
"atom"  of  a  physical  body,  not  as  something  material,  but  as  an 
intersection  of  a  four-dimensional  line  by  the  plane  of  our  con- 
sciousness. 

The  view  of  a  three-dimensional  body  as  the  section  of  a  four- 
dimensional  one  leads  to  the  thought  that  many  (for  us)  separ- 
ate bodies  may  be  the  sections  of  parts  of  one  four-dimensional 
body. 


28  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

A  simple  example  will  clarify  this  thought.  If  we  imagine  a 
horizontal  plane,  intersecting  the  top  of  a  tree,  and  parallel  to  the 
surface  of  the  earth,  then  upon  this  plane  the  sections  of  branches 
will  seem  separate,  and  not  bound  to  one  another.  Yet  in  our 
space,  from  our  standpoint,  these  are  sections  of  branches  of  one 
tree,  comprising  together  one  top,  nourished  from  one  root,  casting 
one  shadow. 

Or  here  is  another  interesting  example  expressing  the  same  idea, 
given  by  Mr.  Leadbeater,  the  theosophical  writer,  in  one  of  his 
books.  If  we  touch  the  surface  of  a  table  with  our  finger  tips,  then 
upon  the  surface  will  be  just  five  circles,  and  from  this  plane  pre- 
sentment it  is  impossible  to  construe  any  idea  of  the  hand,  and  of 
the  man  to  whom  this  hand  belongs.  Upon  the  table's  surface  will 
be  five  separate  circles.  How  from  them  is  it  possible  to  imagine 
a  man,  with  all  the  richness  of  his  physical  and  spiritual  life?  It  is 
impossible.  Our  relation  to  the  four-dimensional  world  will  be 
analogous  to  the  relation  of  that  consciousness  which  sees  five 
circles  upon  the  table  to  a  man.  We  see  just  "finger  tips;"  to  us 
the  fourth  dimension  is  inconceivable. 

We  know  that  it  is  possible  to  represent  a  three-dimensional  body 
upon  a  plane,  that  it  is  possible  to  draw  a  cube,  a  polyhedron  or 
a  sphere.  This  will  not  be  a  real  cube  or  a  real  sphere,  but  the  pro- 
jection of  a  cube  or  of  a  sphere  on  a  plane.  We  may  conceive  of 
the  three-dimensional  bodies  of  our  space  somewhat  in  the  nature 
of  images  in  our  space  of  to  us  incomprehensible  four-dimensional 
bodies. 


CHAPTER  IV 

In  what  direction  may  the  fourth  dimension  lie?  What  is  motion?  Two 
kinds  of  motion — motion  in  space  and  motion  in  time— ;which  are 
contained  in  every  movement.  What  is  time?  Two  ideas  con- 
tained in  the  conception  of  time.  The  new  dimension  of  space,  and 
motion  upon  that  dimension.  Time  as  the  fourth  dimension  of 
space.  Impossibility  of  understanding  the  fourth  dimension  with- 
out the  idea  of  motion.  The  idea  of  motion  and  the  "time  sense." 
The  time  sense  as  a  limit  (surface)  of  the  "space  sense."  Hinton  on 
the  law  of  surfaces.  The  "ether"  as  a  surface.  Riemann's  idea 
concerning  the  translation  of  time  into  space  in  the  fourth  dimen- 
sion. Present,  past,  and  future.  Why  we  do  not  see  the  past  and 
the  future.  Life  as  a  feeling  of  one's  way.  Wundt  on  the  sub- 
ject of  our  sensuous  knowledge. 

E  have  established  by  a  comparison  of  the  relation 
of  lower  dimensional  figures  to  higher  dimensional 
ones  that  it  is  possible  to  regard  a  four-dimen- 
sional body  as  the  tracing  of  the  motion  of  a 
three-dimensional  body  upon  the  dimension  not 
contained  in  it;  i.  е.,  that  the  direction  of  the 
motion  upon  the  fourth  dimension  lies  outside  of  all  the  directions 
which  are  possible  in  three-dimensional  space. 
But  in  what  direction  is  it? 

In  order  to  answer  this  question  it  will  be  necessary  to  discover 
whether  we  do  not  know  some  motion  not  confined  in  three- 
dimensional  space. 

We  know  that  every  motion  in  space  is  accompanied  by  that 
which  we  call  motion  in  time.  Moreover,  we  know  that  everything 
existing,  even  if  not  moving  in  space,  moves  eternally  in  time. 

And  equally  in  all  cases,  whether  speaking  of  motion  or  absence 
of  motion,  we  have  in  mind  an  idea  of  what  was  before,  what  now 
becomes,  and  what  will  follow  after.  In  other  words,  we  have  in 
mind  the  idea  of  time.  The  idea  of  motion  of  any  kind,  also  the 
idea  of  absence  of  motion  is  indissolubly  bound  up  with  the  idea 
of  time.  Any  motion  or  absence  of  motion  proceeds  in  time  and 
cannot  proceed  out  of  time.  Consequently,  before  speaking  of 
what  motion  is,  we  must  answer  the  question,  what  is  time? 

29 


30  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

Time  is  the  most  formidable  and  difficult  problem  which  con- 
fronts humanity. 

Kant  regards  time  as  he  does  space:  as  a  subjective  form  of  our 
receptivity;  i.  е.,  he  says  that  we  create  time  ourselves,  as  a  function 
of  our  receptive  apparatus,  for  convenience  in  perceiving  the  out- 
side world.  Reality  is  continuous  and  constant,  but  in  order  to 
make  possible  the  perception  of  it,  we  must  dissever  it  into  sepa- 
rate moments ;  imagine  it  as  an  infinite  series  of  separate  moments 
out  of  which  there  exists  for  us  only  one.  In  other  words,  we 
perceive  reality  as  though  through  a  narrow  slit,  and  what  we 
are  seeing  through  this  slit  we  call  the  present;  what  we  did  see 
and  now  do  not  see — the  past,  and  what  we  do  not  quite  see  but 
are  expecting — the  future. 

Regarding  each  phenomenon  as  an  effect  of  another,  or  others, 
and  this  in  its  turn  as  a  cause  of  a  third;  that  is,  regarding  all 
phenomena  in  functional  interdependence  one  upon  another,  by 
this  very  act  we  are  contemplating  them  in  time,  because  we 
picture  to  ourselves  quite  clearly  and  precisely  first  a  cause,  then 
an  effect;  first  an  action,  then  its  function,  and  cannot  contem- 
plate them  otherwise.  Thus  we  may  say  that  the  idea  of  time  is 
bound  up  with  the  idea  of  causation  and  functional  interdepend- 
ence. Without  time  causation  cannot  exist,  just  as  without  time 
motion  or  the  absence  of  motion  cannot  exist. 

But  our  perception  concerning  our  "being  in  time"  is  entangled 
and  misty  up  to  improbability. 

First  of  all  let  us  analyze  our  relation  toward  the  past,  present 
and  future.  Usually  we  think  that  the  past  already  does  not  exist. 
It  has  passed,  disappeared,  altered,  transformed  itself  into  some- 
thing else.  The  future  also  does  not  exist — it  does  not  exist  yet. 
It  has  not  arrived,  has  not  formed.  By  the  present  we  mean  the 
moment  of  transition  of  the  future  into  the  past,  i.  е.,  the  moment 
of  transition  of  a  phenomenon  from  one  non-existence  into  another 
one.  Only  for  that  short  moment  does  the  phenomenon  exist  for 
us  in  reality;  before,  it  existed  in  potentiality,  afterward  it  will 
exist  in  remembrance.  But  this  short  moment  is  in  substance  only 
a  fiction:  it  has  no  measurement.  We  have  a  full  right  to  say  that 
the  present  does  not  exist.  We  can  never  catch  it.  That  which 
we  did  catch  is  always  the  past! 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  31 

If  we  are  to  stop  at  that  we  must  admit  that  the  world  does  not 
exist,  or  exists  only  in  some  phantasmagoria  of  illusions,  flashing 

and  disappearing.  д     ,    .int 

Usually  we  take  no  account  of  this,  and   do   not   reflect   that 
our  usual  view  of  time  leads  to  utter  absurdity. 

Let  us  imagine  a  stupid  traveller  going  from  one  city  to  another 
and  half  way  between  these  two  cities.  A  stupid  traveller  thinks 
that  the  city  from  which  he  has  departed  last  week  does  not  exist 
now  only  the  memory  of  it  is  left;  the  walls  are  ruined,  the 
towers  fallen,  the  inhabitants  have  either  died  or  gone  away.  Also 
that  city  at  which  he  is  destined  to  arrive  in  several  days  does  not 
exist  now  either,  but  is  being  hurriedly  built  for  his  arrival,  and 
on  the  day  of  that  arrival  will  be  ready,  populated,  and  set  in 
order,  and  on  the  day  after  his  departure  will  be  destroyed  just  as 

was  the  first  one. 

We  are  thinking  of  things  in  time  exactly  m  this  way— every- 
thing passes  away,  nothing  returns!  The  spring  has  passed,  it 
does  not  exist  still.    The  autumn  has  not  come,  it  does  not  exist 

yet. 

But  what  does  exist? 

The  present.  .     .  .  , 

But  the  present  is  not  a  seizable  moment,  it  is  continuously 

transitory  into  the  past. 

So,  strictly  speaking,  neither  the  past,  nor  the  present,  nor  the 
future  exists  for  us.  Nothing  exists!  And  yet  we  are  living,  teel- 
ing,  thinking— and  something  surrounds  us.  Consequently,  in 
our  usual  attitude  toward  time  there  exists  some  mistake.  Inis 
error  we  shall  endeavor  to  detect. 

We  accepted  in  the  very  beginning  that  something  exists.  We 
called  that  something  the  world.  How  then  can  the  world  exist  it 
it  is  not  existing  in  the  past,  in  the  present,  in  the  future.'' 

That  conception  of  the  world  which  we  deduced  from  our  usual 
view  of  time  makes  the  world  appear  like  a  continuously  gushing 
out  igneous  fountain  of  fireworks,  each  spark  of  which  flashes  lor 
a  moment  and  disappears,  never  to  appear  any  more.  Flashes  are 
going  on  continuously,  following  one  after  another,  there  are  an 
infinite  number  of  sparks,  and  everything  together  produces  the 
impression  of  a  flame,  though  it  does  not  exist  in  reality. 

The  autumn  has  not  come  yet.  It  will  be,  but  it  does  not^  exist 
now     And  we  give  no  thought  to  how  that  can  appear  which  is  not. 


32  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

We  are  moving  upon  a  plane,  and  recognize  as  really  existing 
only  the  small  circle  lighted  by  our  consciousness.  Every  thing  out 
of  this  circle,  which  we  do  not  see,  we  negate,  we  do  not  like  to 
admit  that  it  exists.  We  are  moving  upon  the  plane  in  one  direc- 
tion. This  direction  we  consider  as  eternal  and  infinite.  But  the 
direction  at  right  angles  to  it,  those  lines  which  we  are  intersecting, 
we  do  not  like  to  recognize  as  eternal  and  infinite.  We  imagine 
them  as  going  into  non-existence  at  once,  as  soon  as  we  have 
passed  them,  and  that  the  lines  before  us  have  not  yet  risen  out 
of  non-existence.  If,  presupposing  that  we  are  moving  upon  a 
sphere,  upon  its  equator  or  one  of  its  parallels,  then  it  will  appear 
that  we  recognize  as  really  existing  only  one  meridian:  those  which 
are  behind  us  have  disappeared  and  those  ahead  of  us  have  not 
appeared  yet. 

We  are  going  forward  like  a  blind  man,  who  feels  paving  stones 
and  lanterns  and  walls  of  houses  with  his  stick  and  believes  in  the 
real  existence  of  only  that  which  he  touches  now,  which  he  feels 
now.  That  which  has  passed  has  disappeared  and  will  never  re- 
turn! That  which  has  not  yet  been  does  not  exist.  The  blind 
man  remembers  the  route  which  he  has  traversed;  he  expects  that 
ahead  the  way  will  continue,  but  he  sees  neither  forward  nor  back- 
ward because  he  does  not  see  anything,  because  his  instrument  of 
knowledge — the  stick — has  a  definite,  and  not  very  great  length, 
and  beyond  the  reach  of  his  stick  non-existence  begins. 

Wundt,  in  one  of  his  books,  called  attention  to  the  fact  that 
our  famous  five  organs  of  sense  are  in  reality  just  feelers  by  which 
we  feel  the  world  around  us.  We  live  groping  about.  We  never 
see  anything.  We  are  always  just  feeling  everything.  With  the 
help  of  the  microscope  and  the  telescope,  the  telegraph  and  the 
telephone  we  are  extending  our  feelers  a  little,  so  to  speak,  but  we 
are  not  beginning  to  see.  To  say  that  we  are  seeing  would  be 
possible  only  in  case  we  could  know  the  past  and  the  future.  But 
we  do  not  see,  and  because  of  this  we  can  never  assure  ourselves  of 
that  which  we  cannot  feel. 

This  is  the  reason  why  we  count  as  really  existing  only  that 
circle  which  our  feelers  grasp  at  a  given  moment.  Beyond  that — 
darkness  and  non-existence. 

But  have  we  any  right  to  think  in  this  way? 
Let  us  imagine  a  consciousness  that  is  not  bound  by  the  condi- 
tions of  sensuous  receptivity.    Such  a  consciousness  can  rise  above 
the  plane  upon  which  we  are  moving;  it  can  see  far  beyond  the 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  33 

limits  of  the  circle  enlightened  by  our  usual  consciousness;  it  can 
see  that  not  only  does  the  line  upon  which  we  are  moving  exist, 
but  also  all  lines  perpendicular  to  it  which  we  are  intersecting, 
which  we  have  ever  intersected,  and  which  we  shall  intersect. 
After  rising  above  the  plane  this  consciousness  can  see  the  plane, 
can  convince  itself  that  it  is  really  a  plane,  and  not  a  single  line. 
Then  it  can  see  the  past  and  the  future,  lying  together  and  exist- 
ing simultaneously. 

That  consciousness  which  is  not  bound  by  the  conditions  of 
sensuous  receptivity  can  outrun  the  stupid  traveler,  ascend  the 
mountain  to  see  in  the  distance  the  town  to  which  he  is  going,  and 
be  convinced  that  this  town  is  not  being  built  anew  for  his  arrival, 
but  exists  quite  independently  of  the  stupid  traveler.  And  that 
consciousness  can  look  off  and  see  on  the  horizon  the  towers  of 
that  city  where  that  traveler  had  been,  and  be  convinced  that 
those  towers  have  not  fallen,  that  the  city  continues  to  stay  and 
live  just  as  it  stayed  and  lived  before  the  traveler's  advent. 

It  can  rise  above  the  plane  of  time  and  see  the  spring  behind 
and  the  autumn  ahead,  see  simultaneously  the  budding  flowers 
and  ripening  fruits.  It  can  make  the  blind  man  recover  his  sight 
and  see  the  road  along  which  he  passed  and  that  which  still  lies 
before  him. 

The  past  and  the  future  cannot  not  exist,  because  if  they  do  not 
exist  then  neither  does  the  present  exist.  Unquestionably  they 
exist  somewhere  together,  but  we  do  not  see  them. 

The  present,  compared  with  the  past  and  the  future,  is  the 
most  unreal  of  all  unrealities. 

We  are  forced  to  admit  that  the  past,  the  present  and  the 
future  do  not  differ  in  anything,  one  from  another:  there  exists 
just  one  'present — the  Eternal  Now  of  Hindu  philosophy.  But  we 
do  not  perceive  this,  because  in  every  given  moment  we  experi- 
ence just  a  little  bit  of  that  present,  and  this  alone  we  count  as 
existent,  denying  a  real  existence  to  everything  else. 

If  we  admit  this,  then  our  view  of  everything  with  which  we 
are  surrounded  will  change  very  considerably. 

Usually  we  regard  time  as  an  abstraction,  made  by  us  during  the 
observation  of  really  existing  motion.  That  is,  we  think  that 
observing  motion,  or  changes  of  relations  between  things  and 
comparing  the  relations  which  existed  before,  which  exist  now, 


34  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

and  which   may  exist  in   the  future,  that  we   are  deducing  the 
idea  of  time.    We  shall  see  later  on  how  far  this  view  is  correct. 

Thus  the  idea  of  time  is  composed  of  the  conception  of  the 
past,  of  that  of  the  present,  and  of  that  of  the  future. 

Our  conceptions  of  the  past  and  present,  though  not  very 
clear,  are  yet  very  much  alike.  As  to  the  future  there  exists  a  great 
variety  of  views. 

It  is  necessary  for  us  to  analyze  the  theories  of  the  future  as  they 
exist  in  the  mind  of  contemporary  man. 

There  are  in  existence  two  theories — that  of  the  preordained 
future,  and  that  of  the  free  future. 

Preordination  is  established  in  this  way:  we  say  that  every 
future  event  is  the  result  of  those  which  happened  before,  and  is 
created  such  as  it  will  be  and  not  otherwise  as  a  consequence  of  a 
definite  direction  of  forces  which  are  contained  in  preceding  events. 
This  means,  in  other  words,  that  future  events  are  wholly  con- 
tained in  preceding  ones,  and  if  we  could  know  the  force  and  direc- 
tion of  all  events  which  have  happened  up  to  the  present  moment, 
i.  е.,  if  we  knew  all  the  past,  by  this  we  could  know  all  the  future. 
And  sometimes,  knowing  the  present  moment  thoroughly,  in  all  its 
details,  we  may  really  foretell  the  future.  If  the  prophecy  is  not 
fulfilled,  we  say  that  we  did  not  know  all  that  had  been,  and  we  dis- 
cover in  the  past  some  cause  which  had  escaped  our  observation. 

The  idea  of  the  free  future  is  founded  upon  the  possibility  of 
voluntary  action  and  accidental  new  combinations  of  causes.  The 
future  is  regarded  as  quite  indefinite,  or  defined  only  in  part, 
because  in  every  given  moment  new  forces,  and  new  events  and  new 
phenomena  are  born  which  lie  in  a  potential  state,  not  causeless, 
but  so  incommensurable  with  causes — as  the  firing  of  a  city  from 
one  spark — that  it  is  impossible  to  detect  or  measure  them. 

This  theory  affirms  that  one  and  the  same  action  can  have 
different  results;  one  and  the  same  cause,  different  effects;  and  it 
introduces  the  hypothesis  of  quite  arbitrary  volitional  actions  on 
the  part  of  a  man,  bringing  about  profound  changes  in  the  subse- 
quent events  of  his  own  life  and  the  lives  of  others. 

Supporters  of  the  preordination  theory  contend  on  the  con- 
trary that  volitional,  involuntary  actions  depend  also  upon  causes, 
making  them  necessary  and  unavoidable  at  a  given  moment;  that 
there  is  nothing  accidental,  and  that  there  cannot  be;  that  we  call 
accidental  only  those  things  the  causes  of  which  we  do  not  see  by 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  35 

reason  of  our  limitations;  and  that  different  effects  of  causes  seem- 
ingly the  same  occur  becauses  the  causes  are  different  in  reality 
and  only  seem  similar  for  the  reason  that  we  do  not  understand 
them  well  enough  nor  see  them  sufficiently  clear. 

The  dispute  between  the  theory  of  the  preordained  future  and 
that  of  the  free  future  is  an  infinite  dispute.  Neither  of  these 
theories  can  say  anything  decisive.  This  is  so  because  both 
theories  are  too  literal,  too  inflexible,  too  material,  and  one  repu- 
diates the  other:  both  say,  "either  this  or  the  other."  In  the 
one  case  there  results  a  complete  cold  predestination;  that  which 
will  be,  will  be,  nothing  can  be  changed— that  which  will  befall  to- 
morrow was  predestined  tens  of  thousands  of  years  ago.  There 
results  in  the  other  case  a  life  upon  some  sort  of  needle-point 
called  the  present,  which  is  surrounded  on  all  sides  by  an  abyss  of 
non-existence,  a  journey  in  a  country  which  does  not  yet  exist,  a  life 
in  a  world  which  is  born  and  dies  every  moment,  in  which  nothing 
ever  returns.  And  both  these  opposite  views  are  equally  untrue, 
because  the  truth,  in  the  given  case,  as  in  so  many  others,  is  con- 
tained in  a  union  of  two  opposite  understandings  in  one. 

In  every  given  moment  all  the  future  of  the  world  is  predestined 
and  is  existing,  but  is  predestined  conditionally,  i.  е.,  it  will  be 
such  or  another  future  according  to  the  direction  of  events  at  a 
given  moment,  unless  there  enters  a  new  fact,  and  a  new  fact  can 
enter  only  from  the  side  of  consciousness  and  the  will  resulting 
from  it.     It  is  necessary  to  understand  this,  and  to  master  it. 

Besides  this  we  are  hindered  from  a  right  conception  of  the 
relation  of  the  present  toward  the  future  by  our  misunderstand- 
ing of  the  relation  of  the  present  to  the  past.  The  difference  of 
opinion  exists  only  concerning  the  future;  concerning  the  past  all 
agree  that  it  has  passed,  that  it  does  not  exist  now — and  that  it 
was  such  as  it  has  been.  In  this  last  lies  the  key  to  the  under- 
standing of  the  incorrectness  of  our  views  of  the  future.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  in  reality  our  relation  both  to  the  past  and  to  the 
future  is  far  more  complicated  than  it  seems  to  us.  In  the  past, 
behind  us,  lies  not  only  that  which  really  happened,  but  that  which 
could  have  been.  In  the  same  way,  in  the  future  lies  not  only  that 
which  will  be,  but  everything  that  may  be. 

The  past  and  the  future  are  equally  undetermined,  equally 
exist  in  all  their  possibilities,  and  equally  exist  simultaneously  with 
the  present. 


36  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

By  time  we  mean  the  distance  separating  events  in  the  order  of 
their  succession  and  binding  them  in  different  wholes.  This  dis- 
tance lies  in  a  direction  not  contained  in  three-dimensional  space, 
therefore  it  will  be  the  new  dimension  of  space. 

This  new  dimension  satisfies  all  possible  requirements  of  the 
fourth  dimension  on  the  ground  of  the  preceding  reasoning. 

It  is  incommensurable  with  the  dimensions  of  three-dimensional 
space,  as  a  year  is  incommensurable  with  St.  Petersburg.  It  is 
perpendicular  to  all  directions  of  three-dimensional  space  and  is 
not  parallel  to  any  of  them. 

As  a  deduction  from  all  the  preceding  we  may  say  that  time  (as 
it  is  usually  understood)  includes  in  itself  two  ideas :  that  of  a  cer- 
tain to  us  unknown  space  (the  fourth  dimension),  and  that  of  a 
motion  upon  this  space.  Our  constant  mistake  consists  in  the 
fact  that  in  time  we  never  see  two  ideas,  but  see  always  only  one. 
Usually  we  see  in  time  the  idea  of  motion,  but  cannot  say  from 
whence,  where,  whither,  nor  upon  what  space.  Attempts  have 
been  made  heretofore  to  unite  the  idea  of  the  fourth  dimension 
with  the  idea  of  time.  But  in  those  theories  which  have  attempted 
to  combine  the  idea  of  time  with  the  idea  of  the  fourth  dimension 
appeared  always  the  idea  of  some  spatial  element  as  existing  in 
time,  and  along  with  it  was  admitted  motion  upon  that  space. 
Those  who  were  constructing  these  theories  evidently  did  not 
understand  that  leaving  out  the  possibility  of  motion  they  were 
advancing  the  demand  for  a  new  time,  because  motion  cannot 
proceed  out  of  time.  And  as  a  result  time  goes  ahead  of  us,  like 
our  shadow,  receding  according  as  we  approach  it.  All  our  per- 
ceptions of  motion  have  become  confused.  If  we  imagine  the  new 
dimension  of  space  and  the  possibility  of  motion  upon  this  new 
dimension,  time  will  still  elude  us,  and  declare  that  it  is  unex- 
plained, exactly  as  it  was  unexplained  before. 

It  is  necessary  to  admit  that  by  one  term,  time,  we  designated, 
properly,  two  ideas — "a  certain  space"  and  "motion  upon  that 
space."  This  motion  does  not  exist  in  reality,  and  it  seems  to  us 
as  existing  only  because  we  do  not  see  the  spatiality  of  time.  That 
is,  the  sensation  of  motion  in  time,  (and  motion  out  of  time  does 
not  exist)  arises  in  us  because  we  are  looking  at  the  world  as 
though  through  a  narrow  slit,  and  are  seeing  the  lines  of  in- 
tersection of  the  time-plane  with  our  three-dimensional  space 
only. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  37 

Therefore  it  is  necessary  to  declare  how  profoundly  incorrect 
is  our  usual  theory  that  the  idea  of  time  is  deduced  by  us  from 
the  observation  of  motion,  and  is  really  nothing  more  than  the 
idea  of  that  succession  which  is  observed  by  us  in  motion. 

It  is  necessary  to  recognize  quite  the  reverse:  that  the  idea  of 
motion  is  deduced  by  us  out  of  an  incomplete  sensation  of  time,  or 
of  the  time-sense,  i.  е.,  out  of  a  sense  or  sensation  of  the  fourth 
dimension,  but  out  of  an  incomplete  sensation.  This  incomplete 
sensation  of  time  (of  the  fourth  dimension) — the  sensation 
through  the  slit — gives  us  the  sensation  of  motion,  that  is,  creates 
an  illusion  of  motion  which  does  not  exist  in  reality,  but  instead 
of  which  there  exists  in  reality  only  the  extension  upon  a  direction 
inconceivable  to  us.         

One  other  aspect  of  the  question  has  very  great  significance. 
The  fourth  dimension  is  bound  up  with  the  ideas  of  "time"  and 
"motion."  But  up  to  this  point  we  shall  not  be  able  to  under- 
stand the  fourth  dimension  unless  we  shall  understand  the  fifth 
dimension. 

Attempting  to  look  at  time  as  at  an  object,  Kant  says  that  it 
has  one  dimension:  i.  е.,  he  imagines  time  as  a  line  extending 
from  the  infinite  future  into  the  infinite  past.  Of  one  point  of  this 
line  we  are  conscious — always  only  one  point.  And  this  point 
has  no  dimension  because  that  which  in  the  usual  sense  we  call 
the  present,  is  the  recent  past,  and  sometimes  also  the  near  future. 

This  would  be  true  in  relation  to  our  illusory  perception  of  time. 
But  in  reality  eternity  is  not  the  infinite  dimension  of  time,  but  the 
one  perpendicular  to  time;  because,  if  eternity  exists,  then  every 
moment  is  eternal.  We  can  discover  in  time  two  dimensions.  The 
second  dimension  of  time,  i.  е.,  eternity,  will  be  the  fifth  dimen- 
sion of  space.  The  line  of  the  first  dimension  of  time  extends  in 
that  order  of  succession  of  phenomena  which  are  in  causal  inter- 
dependence— first  the  cause,  then  the  effect:  before,  now,  after. 
The  line  of  the  second  dimension  of  time — the  line  of  eternity — ex- 
tends perpendicularly  to  that  line. 

It  is  impossible  to  understand  the  idea  of  time  without  con- 
ceiving to  ourselves  the  idea  of  eternity;  it  is  likewise  impossible 
to  understand  space  if  we  have  no  idea  of  eternity. 

From  the  standpoint  of  eternity,  time  does  not  differ  in  any- 
thing from  the  other  lines   and  dimensions  of  space — length, 


38  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

breadth,  and  height.  This  means  that  just  as  in  space  exist  the 
things  that  we  do  not  see,  or  speaking  differently,  not  alone  that 
which  we  see,  so  in  time  "events"  exist  before  our  consciousness 
has  touched  them,  and  they  still  exist  after  our  consciousness  has 
left  them  behind.  Consequently,  extension  in  time  is  extension 
into  unknown  space,  and  therefore  time  is  the  fourth  dimension  of 
space. 

But  as  has  been  shown  already,  time  is  not  a  simple,  but  a  com- 
plex conception.  And  we  shall  have  this  in  view — it  consists  of  a 
conception  of  unknown  space,  vanishing  in  the  past  and  future,  and 
of  illusory  motion  upon  this  space. 


It  is  necessary  for  us  to  regard  time  as  a  spatial  conception  con- 
sidered with  relation  to  our  two  data — the  universe  and  con- 
sciousness. 

The  idea  of  time  appears  when  consciousness  comes  in  contact 
with  the  world  through  sensuous  receptivity.  It  has  been  already 
shown  that  because  of  the  properties  of  sensuous  receptivity,  con- 
sciousness sees  the  world  as  through  a  narrow  slit. 

Out  of  this  the  following  questions  arise: 

1.  Why  does  there  exist  in  the  world  illusionary  motion?  That 
is,  why  does  not  consciousness  see  through  this  slit  the  same  thing 
at  all  times?  Why,  behind  the  slit,  do  changes  proceed  creating 
the  illusion  of  motion,  i.  е.,  in  what  manner,  and  how  does  the 
focus  of  our  consciousness  run  over  the  world  of  phenomena?  In 
addition  to  all  this  it  is  necessary  to  remember  that  through  the 
very  same  slit  through  which  it  sees  the  world,  consciousness 
observes  itself  as  part  of  the  world,  and  sees  in  itself  changes  sim- 
ilar to  the  changes  in  the  rest  of  things. 

2.  Why  cannot  consciousness  extend  that  slit? 
We  shall  endeavor  to  answer  these  questions. 

First  of  all  we  shall  remark  that  within  the  limits  of  our  usual 
observation  consciousness  is  always  in  the  same  conditions  and 
cannot  escape  these  conditions.  In  other  words,  it  is  as  it  were 
chained  to  some  plane  above  which  it  cannot  rise.  These  condi- 
tions or  that  plane  we  call  matter.  Our  consciousness  lives,  so  to 
speak,  upon  the  very  plane,  and  never  rises  above  it.  If  conscious- 
ness could  rise  above  this  plane,  so  undoubtedly  it  would  see 
underneath  itself  simultaneously,  a  far  greater  number  of  events 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  39 

than  it  usually  sees  while  on  a  plane.  Just  as  a  man,  ascending  a 
mountain,  or  going  up  in  a  balloon,  begins  to  see  simultaneously 
and  at  once  many  things  which  it  is  impossible  to  see  simultaneous- 
ly and  at  once  from  below:  the  movement  of  two  trains  toward 
one  another  between  which  a  collision  will  occur;  the  approach  of 
an  enemy  detachment  to  a  sleeping  camp ;  two  cities  divided  by  a 
ridge,  etc. — so  consciousness  rising  above  the  plane  in  which  it 
usually  functions,  must  see  simultaneously  the  events  divided  for 
ordinary  consciousness  by  periods  of  time.  These  will  be  the  events 
which  ordinary  consciousness  never  sees  together,  as  cause  and 
effect:  the  work,  and  the  payment;  the  crime  and  the  punishment; 
the  movement  of  trains  toward  one  another  and  their  collision; 
the  approach  of  the  enemy  and  the  battle;  the  sunrise  and  the 
sunset;  the  morning  and  the  evening;  the  day  and  the  night; 
spring,  autumn,  summer  and  winter;  the  birth  and  the  death  of  a 
man. 

The  angle  of  vision  will  enlarge  during  such  an  ascent,  the 
moment  will  expand. 

If  we  imagine  a  consciousness  higher  than  our  consciousness, 
possessing  a  broader  angle  of  view,  then  this  consciousness  will  be 
able  to  grasp,  as  something  simultaneous,  i.  е.,  as  a  moment,  all  that 
is  happening  for  us  during  a  certain  length  of  time — minutes, 
hours,  a  day,  a  month.  Within  the  limits  of  its  moment  such  a 
consciousness  will  not  be  in  a  position  to  discriminate  between 
before,  now,  after,  all  this  will  be  for  it  now.    Now  will  expand. 

But  in  order  for  this  to  happen  it  would  be  necessary  for  us  to 
liberate  ourselves  from  matter,  because  matter  is  nothing  more 
than  the  conditions  of  space  and  time  in  which  we  dwell.  Thence 
arises  the  question:  can  consciousness  leave  the  conditions  of 
material  existence  without  itself  undergoing  fundamental  changes 
or  without  disappearing  altogether,  as  men  of  positivistic  views 
would  affirm. 

This  is  a  debatable  question,  and  later  I  shall  give  examples  and 
proofs,  speaking  on  behalf  of  the  idea  that  our  consciousness  can 
leave  the  conditions  of  materiality.  For  the  present  I  wish  to 
establish  purely  theoretically  what  must  proceed  during  this 
leaving. 

There  would  ensue  the  expansion  of  the  moment,  i.  е.,  all  that  we 
are  apprehending  in  time  would  become  something  like  a  single 
moment,  in  which  the  past,  the  present,  and  the  future  would  be 


40  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

seen  at  once.  This  shows  the  relativity  of  motion,  as  depending 
for  us  upon  the  limitation  of  the  moment,  which  includes  only  a 
very  small  part  of  the  moments  of  life  perceived  by  us. 

We  have  a  perfect  right  to  say,  not  that  "time"  is  deduced  from 
"motion,"  but  that  motion  is  sensed  because  of  the  time-sense. 
We  have  that  sense,  therefore  we  sense  motion.  The  time-sense 
is  the  sensation  of  changing  moments.  If  we  did  not  have  this 
time-sense  we  could  not  feel  motion.  The  "time-sense"  is  itself, 
in  substance,  the  limit  or  the  surface  of  our  "space-sense."  Where 
the  "space-sense"  ends,  there  the  "time-sense"  begins.  It  has 
been  made  clear  that  "time"  is  identical  in  its  properties  with 
"space,"  i.  е.,  it  has  all  the  signs  of  space  extension.  However, 
we  do  not  feel  it  as  spatial  extension,  but  we  feel  it  as  time,  that 
is,  as  something  specific,  inexpressible,  in  other  words,  uninter- 
ruptedly bound  up  with  "motion."  This  inability  to  sense  time 
spatially  has  its  origin  in  the  fact  that  the  time-sense  is  a  misty 
space-sense;  by  means  of  our  time-sense  we  feel  obscurely  the  new 
characteristics  of  space,  which  emerge  from  the  sphere  of  three 
dimensions. 

But  what  is  the  time-sense  and  why  does  there  arise  the  illusion 
of  motion? 

To  answer  this  question  at  all  satisfactorily  is  possible  only  by 
studying  our  consciousness,  our  I. 

"I"  is  a  complicated  quantity,  and  within  itself  goes  on  a  con- 
tinuous motion.  About  the  nature  of  this  motion  we  shall  speak 
later,  but  this  very  motion  inside  of  our  I  creates  the  illusion  of 
motion  around  us,  motion  in  the  material  world. 


The  noted  mathematician  Riemann  understood  that  when 
higher  dimensions  of  space  are  in  question  time,  by  some  means, 
translates  itself  into  space,  and  he  regarded  the  material  atom  as 
the  entrance  of  the  fourth  dimension  into  three-dimensional  space. 

In  one  of  his  books  Hinton  writes  very  interestingly  about 
"surface  tensions." 

The  relationship  of  a  surface  to  a  solid  or  of  a  solid  to  a  higher  solid 
is  one  which  we  often  find  in  nature. 

A  surface  is  nothing  more  nor  less  than  the  relation  between  two 
things.  Two  bodies  touch  each  other.  The  surface  is  the  relationship 
of  one  to  the  other. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  41 

If  our  space  is  in  the  same  co-relation  with  higher  space  as  is  the 
surface  to  our  space,  then  it  may  be  that  our  space  is  really  the  surface, 
that  is  the  place  of  contact,  of  two  higher-dimensional  spaces. 

It  is  a  fact  worthy  of  notice  that  in  the  surface  of  a  fluid  different 
laws  obtain  from  those  which  hold  throughout  the  mass.  There  are  a 
whole  series  of  facts  which  are  grouped  together  under  the  name  of 
surface  tensions,  which  are  of  great  importance  in  physics,  and  by  which 
the  behavior  of  the  surfaces  of  liquids  is  governed. 

And  it  may  well  be  that  the  laws  of  our  universe  are  the  surface  ten- 
sions of  a  higher  universe. 

If  the  surface  be  regarded  as  a  medium  lying  between  bodies,  then 
indeed  it  will  have  no  weight,  but  be  a  powerful  means  of  transmitting 
vibrations.  Moreover,  it  would  be  unlike  any  other  substance,  and  it 
would  be  impossible  to  get  rid  of  it.  However  perfect  a  vacuum  be  made, 
there  would  be  in  this  vacuum  just  as  much  of  this  unknown  medium 
(i.  е.,  of  that  surface)  as  there  was  before. 

Matter  would  pass  freely  through  this  medium.  .  .  vibrations  of 
this  medium  would  tear  asunder  portions  of  matter.  And  involun- 
tarily the  conclusion  would  be  drawn  that  this  medium  was  unlike  any 
ordinary  matter.  .  .  These  would  be  very  different  properties  to 
reconcile  in  one  and  the  same  substance. 

Now  is  there  anything  in  our  experience  which  corresponds  to  this 
medium?     .     .     . 

Do  we  suppose  the  existence  of  any  medium  through  which  matter 
freely  moves,  which  yet  by  its  vibrations  destroys  the  combinations  of 
matter — some  medium  which  is  present  in  every  vacuum  however  per- 
fect, which  penetrates  all  bodies,  is  weightless,  and  yet  can  never  be 
laid  hold  of. 

The  "substance"  which  possesses  all  these  qualities  is  called  the 
"ether."     .     . 

The  properties  of  the  ether  are  a  perpetual  object  of  investigation  in 
science.  .  .  But  taking  into  consideration  the  ideas  expressed  before 
it  would  be  interesting  to  look  at  the  world  supposing  that  we  are  not  in 
it  but  on  the  ether;  where  the  "ether"  is  the  surface  of  contact  of  two 
bodies  of  higher  dimensions.* 

Hinton  here  expresses  an  unusually  interesting  thought,  and 
brings  the  idea  of  the  "ether"  nearer  to  the  idea  of  time.  The 
materialistic,  or  even  the  energetic  understanding  of  contemporary 
physics  of  the  ether  is  perfectly  fruitless — a  dead-end  siding.  For 
Hinton  the  ether  is  not  a  substance  but  only  a  "surface,"  the 
"boundary"  of  something.  But  of  what?  Again  not  that  of  a 
substance,  but  the  boundary,  the  surface,  the  limit  of  one  form 
of  receptivity  and  the  beginning  of  another 

In  one  sentence  the  walls  and  fences  of  the  materialistic  dead- 
end siding  are  broken  down  and  before  our  thought  open  wide 
horizons  of  regions  unexplored. 

*  Hinton,  "A  New  Era  of  Thought,"  pp.  52,  56,  57. 

ч pfiT  Ъооъ     ro!*1    So  ?AK 


CHAPTER  V 

Four-dimensional  space.  "Temporal  body"— Linga  Sharira.  The 
form  of  a  human  body  from  birth  to  death.  Incommensurabil- 
ity of  three-dimensional  and  four-dimensional  bodies.  Newton  s 
fluents.  The  unreality  of  constant  quantities  in  our  world.  The 
right  and  the  left  hands  in  three-dimensional  and  in  four-dimen- 
sional space.  Difference  between  three-dimensional  and  four- 
dimensional  space.  Not  two  different  spaces  but  different  meth- 
ods of  receptitivity  of  one  and  the  same  world. 

OUR-DIMENSIONAL  space,  if  we  try  to  imagine  it  to 
ourselves,  will  be  the  infinite  repetition  of  our  space,  of 
our  infinite  three-dimensional  sphere,  as  a  line  is  the 
infinite  repetition  of  a  point. 

Many  things  that  have  been  said  before  will  become 
much  clearer  to  us  when  we  dwell  on  the  fact  that  the 
fourth  dimension  must  be  sought  for  in  time. 

It  will  become  clear  what  is  meant  by  the  fact  that  it  is  possible 
to  regard  a  four-dimensional  body  as  the  tracing  of  the  movement 
in  space  of  a  three-dimensional  body  in  a  direction  not  confined 
within  that  space.  Now  the  direction  not  confined  in  three- 
dimensional  space  in  which  any  three-dimensional  body  moves— 
this  is  the  direction  of  time.  Any  three-dimensional  body,  exist- 
ing, is  at  the  same  time  moving  in  time  and  leaves  as  a  tracing 
of  its  movement  the  temporal,  or  four-dimensional  body.  We 
never  see  nor  feel  this  body,  because  of  the  limitations  of  our  re- 
ceptive apparatus,  but  we  see  the  section  of  it  only,  which  section 
we  call  the  three-dimensional  body.  Therefore  we  are  in  error  in 
thinking  that  the  three-dimensional  body  is  in  itself  something 
real.  It  is  the  projection  of  the  four-dimensional  body — its  pic- 
ture— the  image  of  it  on  our  plane. 

The  four-dimensional  body  is  the  infinite  number  of  three- 
dimensional  ones.  That  is,  the  four-dimensional  body  is  the  in- 
finite number  of  moments  of  existence  of  the  three-dimensional 
one— its  states  and  positions.  The  three-dimensional  body  which 
we  see  appears  as  a  single  figure — one  of  a  series  of  pictures  on  a 
cinematographic  film  as  it  were. 

43 


44  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

Four-dimensional  space — time — is  really  the  distance  between 
forms,  states,  and  positions,  of  one  and  the  same  body  (and 
different  bodies,  i.  е.,  those  seeming  different  to  us).  It  separates 
those  states,  forms,  and  positions  each  from  the  other,  and  it 
binds  them  also  into  some  to  us  incomprehensible  whole.  This 
incomprehensible  whole  can  be  formed  in  time  out  of  one  physical 
body — and  out  of  different  bodies. 

It  is  easier  for  us  to  imagine  the  temporal  whole  as  related  to  one 
physical  body. 

If  we  consider  the  physical  body  of  a  man,  we  will  find  in  it 
besides  its  "matter"  something,  it  is  true,  changing,  but  undoubt- 
edly one  and  the  same  from  birth  until  death. 

This  something  is  the  Linga-Sharira  of  Hindu  philosophy,  i.  е., 
the  form  on  which  our  physical  body  is  moulded.  (H.  P.  Blavatsky : 
"The  Secret  Doctrine.")  Eastern  philosophy  regards  the  phy- 
sical body  as  something  impermanent,  which  is  in  a  condition  of 
perpetual  interchange  with  its  surroundings.  The  particles 
come  and  go.  After  one  second  the  body  is  already  not  absolutely 
the  same  as  it  was  one  second  before.  To-day  it  is  in  a  con- 
siderable degree  not  that  which  it  was  yesterday.  After  seven 
years  it  is  a  quite  different  body.  But  despite  all  this,  something 
always  persists  from  birth  to  death,  changing  its  aspect  a  little, 
but  remaining  the  same.    This  is  the  Linga-Sharira. 

The  Linga-Sharira  is  the  form,  the  image,  it  changes,  but  re- 
mains the  same.  That  image  of  a  man  which  we  are  able  to  repre- 
sent to  ourselves  is  not  the  Linga-Sharira.  But  if  we  try  to  repre- 
sent to  ourselves  mentally  the  image  of  a  man  from  birth  to 
death,  with  all  the  particularities  and  traits  of  childhood,  man- 
hood and  senility,  as  though  extended  in  time,  then  it  will  be  the 
Linga-Sharira. 

Form  pertains  to  all  things.  We  say  that  everything  consists  of 
matter  and  form.  Under  the  category  of  "matter,"  as  already 
stated,  the  cause  of  a  lengthy  series  of  mixed  sensations  is  predi- 
cated, but  matter  without  form  is  not  comprehensible  to  us;  we 
cannot  even  think  of  matter  without  form.  But  we  can  think  and 
imagine  form  without  matter. 

The  thing,  i.  е.,  the  union  of  form  and  matter,  is  never  constant; 
it  always  changes  in  the  course  of  time.  This  idea  afforded 
Newton  the  possibility  of  building  his  theory  of  fluents  and 
fluxions. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  45 

Newton  came  to  the  conclusion  that  constant  quantities  do  not 
exist  in  Nature.  Variables  do  exist — flowing,  fluents  only. 
The  velocities  with  which  different  fluents  change  were  called  by 
Newton  fluxions. 

From  the  standpoint  of  this  theory  all  things  known  to  us— 
men,  plants,  animals,  planets— are  fluents,  and  they  differ  by  the 
magnitude  of  their  fluxions.  But  the  thing,  changing  continu- 
ously in  time,  sometimes  very  much,  and  quickly,  as  in 
the  case  of  a  living  body  for  example,  still  remains  one  and  the 
same.  The  body  of  a  man  in  youth,  the  body  of  a  man  in  senil- 
ity— these  are  one  and  the  same,  though  we  know  that  in  the 
old  body  there  is  not  one  atom  left  that  was  in  the  young  one. 
The  matter  changes,  but  something  remains  one  under  all  changes, 
this  something  is  the  Linga-Sharira.  Newton's  theory  is  valid 
for  the  three-dimensional  world  existing  in  time.  In  this  world 
there  is  nothing  constant.  All  is  variable  because  every  consecu- 
tive moment  the  thing  is  already  not  that  which  it  was  before. 
We  never  see  the  Linga-Sharira,  we  see  always  its  parts,  and  they 
appear  to  us  variable.  But  if  we  observe  more  attentively  we 
shall  see  that  it  is  an  illusion.  Things  of  three  dimensions  are  un- 
real and  variable.  They  cannot  be  real  because  they  do  not  exist 
in  reality,  just  as  the  imaginary  sections  of  a  solid  do  not  exist. 
Four-dimensional  bodies  alone  are  real. 

In  one  of  the  lectures  contained  in  the  book,  "A  Pluralistic 
Universe,"  Prof.  James  calls  attention  to  Prof.  Bergson's  remark 
that  science  studies  always  the  t  of  the  universe  only,  i.  е.,  not  the 
universe  in  its  entirety,  but  the  moment,  the  "temporal  section" 
of  the  universe. 


The  properties  of  four-dimensional  space  will  become  clearer 
to  us  if  we  compare  in  detail  three-dimensional  space  with  the 
surface,  and  discover  the  difference  existing  between  them. 

Hinton,  in  his  book,  "A  New  Era  of  Thought,"  examines  these 
differences  very  attentively.  He  represents  to  himself,  on  a  plane, 
two  equal  rectangular  triangles,  cut  out  of  paper,  the  right  angles 
of  which  are  placed  in  opposite  directions.  These  triangles  will  be 
equal,  but  for  some  reason  quite  different.  The  right  angle  of  one 
is  directed  to  the  right,  that  of  the  other  to  the  left.  If  anyone 
wants  to  make  them  quite  similar,  it  is  possible  to  do  so  only  with 


46  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

the  help  of  three-dimensional  space.  That  is,  it  is  necessary  to 
take  one  triangle,  turn  it  over,  and  put  it  back  on  the  plane.  Then 
they  will  be  two  equal,  and  exactly  similar  triangles.  But  in  order 
to  effect  this,  it  was  necessary  to  take  one  triangle  from  the  plane 
into  three-dimensional  space,  and  turn  it  over  in  that  space. 
If  the  triangle  is  left  on  the  plane,  then  it  will  never  be  possible 
to  make  it  identical  with  the  other,  keeping  the  same  relation  of 
angles  of  the  one  to  those  of  the  other.  If  the  triangle  is  merely 
rotated  in  the  plane  this  similarity  will  never  be  established.  In 
our  world  there  are  figures  quite  analogous  to  these  two  triangles. 

We  know  certain  shapes  which  are  equal  the  one  to  the  other,  which 
are  exactly  similar,  and  yet  which  we  cannot  make  fit  into  the  same 
portion  of  space,  either  practically  or  by  imagination. 

If  we  look  at  our  two  hands  we  see  this  clearly,  though  the  two  hands 
represent  a  complex  case  of  a  symmetrical  similarity.  Now  there  is  one 
way  in  which  the  right  hand  and  the  left  hand  may  practically  be 
brought  into  likeness.  If  we  take  the  right  hand  glove  and  the  left  hand 
glove,  they  will  not  fit  any  more  than  the  right  hand  will  coincide  with 
the  left  hand;  but  if  we  turn  one  glove  inside  out,  then  it  will  fit.  Now 
suppose  the  same  thing  done  with  the  solid  hand  as  is  done  with  the 
glove  when  it  is  turned  inside  out,  we  must  suppose  it,  so  to  speak, 
pulled  through  itself.  .  .  If  such  an  operation  were  possible,  the 
right  hand  would  be  turned  into  an  exact  model  of  the  left  hand.* 

But  such  an  operation  would  be  possible  in  the  higher  dimen- 
sional space  only,  just  as  the  overturning  of  the  triangle  is  possible 
only  in  a  space  relatively  higher  than  the  plane.  Even  granting 
the  existence  of  four-dimensional  space  it  is  possible  that  the 
turning  of  the  hand  inside  out  and  the  pulling  of  it  through  itself 
is  a  practical  impossibility  on  account  of  causes  independent  of 
geometrical  conditions.  But  this  does  not  diminish  its  value  as 
an  example.  Things  like  the  turning  of  the  hand  inside  out  are 
possible  theoretically  in  four-dimensional  space  because  in  this 
space  different,  and  even  distant  points  of  our  space  and  time 
touch,  or  have  the  possibility  of  contact.  All  points  of  a  sheet  of 
paper  lying  on  a  table  are  separated  one  from  another,  but  by 
taking  the  sheet  from  the  table  it  is  possible  to  fold  it  in  such  a 
way  as  to  bring  together  any  given  points.  If  on  one  corner  is 
written  St.  Petersburg,  and  on  another  Madras,  nothing  prevents 
the  putting  together  of  these  corners.  And  if  on  the  third  corner 
is  written  the  year  1812,  and  on  the  fourth  1912,  these  corners  can 
touch  each  other  too.    If  on  one  corner  the  year  is  written  in  red 

*  C.  H.  Hinton,  "A  New  Era  of  Thought,"  p.  44. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  47 

ink,  and  the  ink  has  not  yet  dried,  then  the  figures  may  imprint 
themselves  on  the  other  corner.  And  if  afterwards  the  sheet  is 
straightened  out  and  laid  on  the  table,  it  will  be  perfectly  incom- 
prehensible, to  a  man  who  has  not  followed  the  operation,  how 
the  figure  from  one  corner  could  transfer  itself  to  another  corner. 
For  such  a  man  the  possibility  of  the  contact  of  remote  points 
of  the  sheet  will  be  incomprehensible,  and  it  will  remain  incom- 
prehensible so  long  as  he  thinks  of  the  sheet  in  two-dimensional 
space  only.  The  moment  he  imagines  the  sheet  in  three-dimen- 
sional space  this  possibility  will  become  real  and  obvious  to  him. 

In  considering  the  relation  of  the  fourth  dimension  to  the  three 
known  to  us,  we  must  conclude  that  our  geometry  is  obviously 
insufficient  for  the  investigation  of  higher  space. 

As  before  stated,  a  four-dimensional  body  is  as  incommensur- 
able with  a  three-dimensional  one  as  a  year  is  incommensurable 
with  St.  Petersburg. 

It  is  quite  clear  why  this  is  so.  The  four-dimensional  body 
consists  of  an  infinitely  great  number  of  three-dimensional  ones; 
accordingly,  there  cannot  be  a  common  measure  for  them.  The 
three-dimensional  body,  in  comparison  with  the  four-dimen- 
sional one  is  equivalent  to  the  point  in  comparison  with  the  line. 

And  just  as  the  point  is  incommensurable  with  the  line,  so  is  the 
line  incommensurable  with  the  surface;  as  the  surface  is  incom- 
mensurable with  the  solid  body,  so  is  the  three-dimensional  body 
incommensurable  with  the  four-dimensional  one. 

It  is  clear  also  why  the  geometry  of  three  dimensions  is  insuffi- 
cient for  the  definition  of  the  position  of  the  region  of  the  fourth 
dimension  in  relation  to  three-dimensional  space. 

Just  as  in  the  geometry  of  one  dimension,  that  is,  upon  the  line, 
it  is  impossible  to  define  the  position  of  the  surface,  the  side  of 
which  constitutes  the  given  line;  just  as  in  the  geometry  of  two 
dimensions,  i.  е.,  upon  the  surface,  it  is  impossible  to  define  the 
position  of  the  solid,  the  side  of  which  constitutes  the  given  sur- 
face, so  in  the  geometry  of  three  dimensions,  in  three-dimensional 
space,  it  is  impossible  to  define  a  four-dimensional  space.  Briefly 
speaking,  as  planimetry  is  insufficient  for  the  investigation  of  the 
problems  of  stereometry,  so  is  stereometry  insufficient  for  four- 
dimensional  space. 

As  a  conclusion  from  all  of  the  above  we  may  repeat  that  every 
point  of  our  space  is  the  section  of  a  line  in  higher  space,  or  as 


48  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

В.  Riemann  expressed  it:  the  material  atom  is  the  entrance  of  the 
fourth  dimension  into  three-dimensional  space. 


For  a  nearer  approach  to  the  problem  of  higher  dimensions  and 
of  higher  space  it  is  necessary  first  of  all  to  understand  the  consti- 
tion  and  properties  of  the  higher  dimensional  region  in  comparison 
with  the  region  of  three  dimensions.  Then  only  will  appear  the 
possibility  of  a  more  exact  investigation  of  this  region,  and  a  classi- 
fication of  the  laws  governing  it. 

What  is  it  that  it  is  necessary  to  understand? 

It  seems  to  me  that  first  of  all  it  is  necessary  to  understand  that 
we  are  considering  not  two  regions  spatially  different,  and 
not  two  regions  of  which  one  (again  spatially,  "geometrically") 
constitutes  a  part  of  the  other,  but  two  methods  of  receptivity  of 
one  and  the  same  unique  world  of  a  space  which  is  unique. 

Furthermore  it  is  necessary  to  understand  that  all  objects 
known  to  us  exist  not  only  in  those  categories  in  which  they  are 
perceived  by  us,  but  in  an  infinite  number  of  others  in  which  we 
do  not  and  cannot  sense  them.  And  we  must  learn  first  to  think 
things  in  other  categories,  and  then  so  far  as  we  are  able,  to  im- 
agine them  therein.  Only  after  doing  this  can  we  possibly  develop 
the  faculty  to  apprehend  them  in  higher  space — and  to  sense 
"higher"  space  itself. 

Or  perhaps  the  first  necessity  is  the  direct  perception  of  every- 
thing in  the  outside  world  which  does  not  fit  into  the  frame  of 
three  dimensions,  which  exists  independently  of  the  categories  of 
time  and  space — everything  that  for  this  reason  we  are  accustomed 
to  consider  as  non-existent.  If  variability  is  an  indication  of  the 
three-dimensional  world,  then  let  us  search  for  the  constant  and  there- 
by approach  to  an  understanding  of  the  four-dimensional  world. 

We  have  become  accustomed  to  count  as  really  existing  only 
that  which  is  measurable  in  terms  of  length,  breadth  and  height, 
but  as  has  been  shown  it  is  necessary  to  expand  the  limits  of  the 
really  existing.  Mensurability  is  too  rough  an  indication  of  exist- 
ence, because  mensurability  itself  is  too  conditioned  a  concep- 
tion. We  may  say  that  for  any  approach  to  the  exact  investiga- 
tion of  the  higher  dimensional  region  the  certainty  obtained  by 
the  immediate  sensation  is  probably  indispensable,  that  much 
that  is  immeasurable  exists  just  as  really  as,  and  even  more  really 
than,  much  that  is  measurable. 


CHAPTER  VI 

Methods  of  investigation  of  the  problem  of  higher  dimensions.  The 
analogy  between  imaginary  worlds  of  different  dimensions.  The 
one-dimensional  world  on  a  line.  "Space"  and  "time"  of  a  one- 
dimensional  being.  The  two-dimensional  world  on  a  plane. 
"Space"  and  "time,"  "ether,"  "matter"  and  "motion"  of  a  two- 
dimensional  being.  Reality  and  illusion  on  a  plane.  The  impossi- 
bility of  seeing  an  "angle."  An  angle  as  motion.  The  incompre- 
hensibility to  a  two-dimensional  being  of  the  functions  of  things  in 
our  world.  Phenomena  and  noumena  of  a  two-dimensional  being. 
How  could  a  plane  being  comprehend  the  third  dimension? 

SERIES  of  analogies  and  comparisons  are  used  for 
the  definition  of  that  which  can  be,  and  that  which 
cannot  be,  in  the  region  of  the  higher  dimension. 
Fechner,    Hinton,    and    many   others    employ  this 
method. 
They  imagine  "worlds"  of  one,  and  of  two  dimensions,  and  out 
of  the  relations  of  lower-dimensional  worlds  to  higher  ones  they 
deduce  possible  relations   of  our  world  to  one  of  four  dimen- 
sions; just  as  out  of  the  relations  of  points  to  lines,  of  lines  to 
surfaces,  and  of  surfaces  to  solids  we  deduce  the  relations  of  our 
solids  to  four-dimensional  ones. 

Let  us  try  to  investigate  everything  that  this  method  of  analogy 
can  yield. 
^>G       Let  us  imagine  a  world  of  one  dimension. 

It  will  be  a  line.  Upon  this  line  let  us  imagine  living  beings. 
Upon  this  line,  which  represents  the  universe  for  them,  they  will 
be  able  to  move  forward  and  backward  only,  and  these  beings  will 
be  as  the  points,  or  segments  of  a  line.  Nothing  will  exist  for  them 
outside  their  line — and  they  will  not  be  aware  of  the  line  upon 
which  they  are  living  and  moving.  For  there  will  exist  only  two 
points,  ahead  and  behind,  or  may  be  just  one  point  ahead. 
Noticing  the  change  in  states  of  these  points,  the  one-dimensional 
being  will  call  these  changes  phenomena.  If  we  suppose  the  line 
upon  which  the  one-dimensional  being  lives  to  be  passing  through 
the  different  objects  of  our  world,  then  of  all  these  objects  the 

49 


50  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

one-dimensional  being  will  perceive  one  point  only;  if  different 
bodies  intersect  his  line,  the  one-dimensional  being  will  sense  them 
only  as  the  appearance,  the  more  or  less  prolonged  existence,  and 
the  disappearance  of  a  point.  This  appearance,  existence,  and 
disappearance  of  a  point  will  constitute  a  phenomenon.  Phe- 
nomena, according  to  the  character  and  properties  of  passing  ob- 
jects and  the  velocity  and  properties  of  their  motions,  for  the  one- 
dimensional  being  will  be  constant  or  variable,  long  or  short- 
timed,  periodical  or  unperiodical.  But  the  one-dimensional  being 
will  be  absolutely  unable  to  understand  or  explain  the  con- 
stancy or  variability,  the  duration  or  brevity,  the  periodicity  or 
unperiodicity  of  the  phenomena  of  his  world,  and  will  regard 
them  simply  as  properties  pertaining  to  them.  The  solids  inter- 
secting his  line  may  be  different,  but  for  the  one-dimensional  being 
all  phenomena  will  be  absolutely  identical — just  the  appearance  or 
the  disappearance  of  a  point — and  phenomena  will  differ  only  in 
duration  and  greater  or  less  periodicity. 

Such  strange  monotony  and  similarity  of  the  diverse  and  hetero- 
geneous phenomena  of  our  world  will  be  the  characteristic  pecu- 
liarity of  the  one-dimensional  world. 

Moreover,  if  we  assume  that  the  one-dimensional  being  pos- 
sesses memory,  it  is  clear  that  recalling  all  the  points  seen  by  him 
as  phenomena,  he  will  refer  them  to  time.  The  point  which  was: 
this  is  the  phenomenon  already  non-existent,  and  the  point  which 
may  appear  tomorrow:  this  is  the  phenomenon  which  does  not 
exist  yet.  All  of  our  space  except  one  line  will  be  in  the  category 
of  time,  i.  е.,  something  wherefrom  phenomena  come  and  into 
which  they  disappear.  And  the  one-dimensional  being  will  de- 
clare that  the  idea  of  time  arises  for  him  out  of  the  observation  of 
motion,  that  is  to  say,  out  of  the  appearance  and  disappearance 
of  points.  These  will  be  considered  as  temporal  phenomena,  be- 
ginning at  that  moment  when  they  become  visible,  and  ending — 
ceasing  to  exist — at  that  moment  when  they  become  invisible. 
The  one-dimensional  being  will  not  be  in  a  position  to  imagine 
that  the  phenomenon  goes  on  existing  somewhere,  though  invisi- 
bly to  him;  or  he  will  imagine  it  as  existing  somewhere  on  his  line, 
far  ahead  of  him. 

We  can  imagine  this  one-dimensional  being  more  vividly.  Let 
us  take  an  atom,  hovering  in  space,  or  simply  a  particle  of  dust, 
carried  along  by  the  air,  and  let  us  imagine  that  this  atom  or  par- 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  61 

tide  of  dust  possesses  a  consciousness,  i.  е.,  separates  himself  from 
the  outside  world,  and  is  conscious  only  of  that  which  lies  in  the 
line  of  his  motion,  and  with  which  he  himself  comes  in  contact.  He 
will  then  be  a  one-dimensional  being  in  the  full  sense  of  the  word. 
He  can  fly  and  move  in  all  directions,  but  it  will  always  seem  to  him 
that  he  is  moving  upon  a  single  line;  outside  of  this  line  will  be  for 
him  only  great  Nothingness — the  whole  universe  will  appear  to 
him  as  one  line.  He  will  feel  none  of  the  turns  and  angles  of  his 
line,  for  to  feel  an  angle  it  is  necessary  to  be  conscious  of  that 
which  lies  to  right  or  left,  above  or  below.  In  all  other  respects 
such  a  being  will  be  absolutely  identical  with  the  before-described 
imaginary  being  living  upon  the  imaginary  line.  Everything  that 
he  comes  in  contact  with,  that  is,  everything  that  he  is  conscious 
of,  will  seem  to  him  to  be  emerging  from  time,  i.  е.,  from  nothing, 
and  vanishing  into  time,  i.  е.,  into  nothing.  This  nothing  will  be 
all  our  world.  All  our  world  except  one  line  will  be  called  time 
and  will  be  counted  as  actually  non-existent. 


Let  us  next  consider  the  two-dimensional  world,  and  the  being 
living  on  a  plane.  The  universe  of  this  being  will  be  one  great 
plane.  Let  us  imagine  beings  on  this  plane  having  the  shape  of 
points,  lines,  and  flat  geometrical  figures.  The  objects  and 
"solids"  of  that  world  will  have  the  shape  of  flat  geometrical 
figures  too. 

In  what  manner  will  a  being  living  on  such  a  plane  universe 
cognize  his  world? 

First  of  all  we  can  affirm  that  he  will  not  feel  the  plane  upon 
which  he  lives.  He  will  not  do  so  because  he  will  feel  the  objects, 
i.  е.,  figures,  which  are  on  this  plane.  He  will  feel  the  lines  which 
limit  them,  and  for  this  reason  he  will  not  feel  his  plane,  for  in  that 
case  he  would  not  be  in  a  position  to  discern  the  lines.  The  lines 
will  differ  from  the  plane  in  that  they  produce  sensations;  there- 
fore they  exist.  The  plane  does  not  produce  sensations;  therefore 
it  does  not  exist.  Moving  on  the  plane,  the  two-dimensional 
being,  feeling  no  sensations,  will  declare  that  nothing  now  exists. 
After  having  encountered  some  figure,  having  sensed  its  lines,  he 
will  say  that  something  appeared.  But  gradually,  by  a  process  of 
reasoning,  the  two-dimensional  being  will  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  figures  he  encounters  exist  on  something,  or  in  something. 


52  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

Thereupon  he  may  name  such  a  plane  (he  will  not  know,  indeed, 
that  it  is  a  plane)  the  "ether."  Accordingly  he  will  declare  that 
the  "ether"  fills  all  space,  but  differs  in  its  qualities  from  "mat- 
ter." By  "matter"  he  will  mean  lines.  Having  come  to  this  con- 
clusion the  two-dimensional  being  will  regard  all  processes  as 
happening  in  his  "ether,"  i.  е.,  in  his  space.  He  will  not  be  in  a 
position  to  imagine  anything  outside  of  this  ether,  that  is,  out  of 
his  plane.  If  anything,  proceeding  out  of  his  plane,  comes  in  con- 
tact with  his  consciousness,  then  he  will  either  deny  it,  or  regard  it 
as  something  subjective,  the  creation  of  his  own  imagination,  or 
else  he  will  believe  that  it  is  proceeding  right  on  the  plane,  in  the 
ether,  as  are  all  other  phenomena. 

Sensing  lines  only,  the  plane  being  will  not  sense  them  as  we  do. 
First  of  all,  he  will  see  no  angle.    It  is  extremely  easy  for  us  to 
verify  this  by  experiment.     If  we  will  hold  before  our  eyes  two 
matches,  inclined  one  to  the  other  in  a  horizontal  plane,  then  we 
shall  see  one  line.  To  see  the  angle  we  shall  have  to  look  from  above. 
The  two-dimensional  being  cannot  look  from  above  and  therefore 
cannot  see  the  angle.    But  measuring  the  distance  between  the 
lines  of  different  "solids"  of  his  world,  the  two-dimensional  being 
will  come  continually  in  contact  with  the  angle,  and  he  will  regard 
it  as  a  strange  property  of  the  line,  which  is  sometimes  manifest 
and  sometimes  is  not.    That  is,  he  will  refer  the  angle  to  time, 
he  will  regard  it  as  a  temporary,  evanescent  phenomenon,  a  change 
in  the  state  of  a  "solid,"  or  as  motion.    It  is  difficult  for  us  to  un- 
derstand this.    It  is  difficult  to  imagine  how  the  angle  can  be  re- 
garded as  motion.    But  it  must  be  absolutely  so,  and  cannot  be 
otherwise.     If  we  try  to  represent  to  ourselves  how  the  plane 
being  studies  the  square,  then  certainly  we  shall  find  that  for  the 
plane  being  the  square  will  be  a  moving  body.    Let  us  imagine 
that  the  plane  being  is  opposite  one  of  the  angles  of  the  square. 
He  does  not  see  the  angle — before  him  is  a  line,  but  a  line  possess- 
ing very  curious  properties.     Approaching  this  line,  the  two- 
dimensional  being  observes  that  a  strange  thing  is  happening  to 
the  line.     One  point  remains  in  the  same  position,  and  other 
points  are  withdrawing  back  from  both  sides.    We  repeat,  that  the 
two-dimensional  being  has  no  idea  of  an  angle.    Apparently  the 
line  remains  the  same  as  it  was,  yet  something  is  happening  to  it, 
without  a  doubt.    The  plane  being  will  say  that  the  line  is  moving, 
but  so  rapidly  as  to  be  imperceptible  to  sight.    If  the  plane  being 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  53 

goes  away  from  the  angle  and  follows  along  a  side  of  the  square, 
then  the  side  will  become  immobile.  When  he  comes  to  the  angle, 
he  will  notice  the  motion  again.  After  going  around  the  square 
several  times,  he  will  establish  the  fact  of  regular,  periodical  mo- 
tions of  the  line.  Quite  probably  in  the  mind  of  the  plane  being 
the  square  will  assume  the  form  of  a  body  possessing  the  property 
of  periodical  motions,  invisible  to  the  eye,  but  producing  definite 
physical  effects  (molecular  motion) — or  it  will  remain  there  as  a 
perception  of  periodical  moments  of  rest  and  motion  in  one  com- 
plex line,  and  still  more  probably  it  will  seem  to  be  a  rotating 
body. 

Quite  possibly  the  plane  being  will  regard  the  angle  as  his  own 
subjective  perception,  and  will  doubt  whether  any  objective 
reality  corresponds  to  this  subjective  perception.  Nevertheless 
he  will  reflect  that  if  there  is  action,  yielding  to  measurement,  so 
must  there  be  the  cause  of  it,  consisting  in  the  change  of  the  state 
of  the  line,  i.  е.,  in  motion. 

The  lines  visible  to  the  plane  being  he  may  call  matter,  and  the 
angles — motion.  That  is,  he  may  call  the  broken  line  with  an 
angle,  moving  matter.  And  truly  to  him  such  a  line  by  reason  of 
its  properties  will  be  quite  analogous  to  matter  in  motion. 

If  a  cube  were  to  rest  upon  the  plane  upon  which  the  plane 
being  lives,  then  this  cube  will  not  exist  for  the  two-dimensional 
being,  but  only  the  square  face  of  the  cube  in  contact  with  the 
plane  will  exist  for  him — as  a  line,  with  periodical  motions.  Cor- 
respondingly, all  other  solids  lying  outside  of  his  plane,  in  contact 
with  it,  or  passing  through  it,  will  not  exist  for  the  plane  being. 
The  planes  of  contact  or  cross-sections  of  these  bodies  will  alone 
be  sensed.  But  if  these  planes  or  sections  move  or  change,  then 
the  two-dimensional  being  will  think,  indeed,  that  the  cause  of 
the  change  or  motion  is  in  the  bodies  themselves,  i.e.,  right  there 
on  his  plane. 

As  has  been  said,  the  two-dimensional  being  will  regard  the 
straight  lines  only  as  immobile  matter;  irregular  lines  and  curves 
will  seem  to  him  as  moving.  So  far  as  really  moving  lines  are 
concerned,  that  is,  lines  limiting  the  cross  sections  or  planes  of 
contact  passing  through,  or  moving  along  the  plane,  these  will  be 
for  the  two-dimensional  being  something  inconceivable  and  in- 
commensurable. It  will  be  as  though  there  were  in  them  the 
presence  of  something  independent,  depending  upon  itself  only, 


54  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

animated.  This  effect  will  proceed  from  two  causes:  He  can 
measure  the  immobile  angles  and  curves,  the  properties  of  which 
the  two-dimensional  being  calls  motion,  for  the  reason  that  they 
are  immobile;  moving  figures,  on  the  contrary,  he  cannot  measure, 
because  the  changes  in  them  will  be  out  of  his  control.  These 
changes  will  depend  upon  the  properties  of  the  whole  body  and  its 
motion,  and  of  that  whole  body  the  two-dimensional  being 
will  know  only  one  side  or  section.  Not  perceiving  the  existence  of 
this  body,  and  contemplating  the  motion  pertaining  to  the  sides 
and  sections  he  probably  will  regard  them  as  living  beings.  He  will 
affirm  that  there  is  something  in  them  which  differentiates  them 
from  other  bodies:  vital  energy,  or  even  soul.  That  something 
will  be  regarded  as  inconceivable,  and  really  will  be  inconceivable 
to  the  two-dimensional  being,  because  to  him  it  is  the  result  of 
an  incomprehensible  motion  of  inconceivable  solids. 

If  we  imagine  an  immobile  circle  upon  the  plane,  then  for  the 
two-dimensional  being  it  will  appear  as  a  moving  line  with  some 
very  strange  and  to  him  inconceivable  motions. 

The  two-dimensional  being  will  never  see  that  motion.  Perhaps 
he  will  call  such  motion  molecular  motion,  i.e.,  the  movement  of 
minutest  invisible  particles  of  "matter." 

Moreover,  a  circle  rotating  around  an  axis  passing  through  its 
center  for  the  two-dimensional  being  will  differ  in  some  incon- 
ceivable way  from  the  immobile  circle.  Both  will  appear  to  be 
moving,  but  moving  differently. 

For  the  two-dimensional  being  a  circle  or  a  square,  rotating 
around  its  center,  on  account  of  its  double  motion  will  be  an  inex- 
plicable and  incommensurable  phenomenon,  like  a  phenomenon 
of  life  for  a  modern  physicist. 

Therefore,  for  a  two-dimensional  being,  a  straight  line  will  be 
immobile  matter;  a  broken  or  a  curved  line — matter  in  motion; 
and  a  moving  line — living  matter. 

The  center  of  a  circle  or  a  square  will  be  inaccessible  to  the 
plane  being,  just  as  the  center  of  a  sphere  or  of  a  cube  made  of 
solid  matter  is  inaccessible  to  us — and  for  the  two-dimensional 
being  even  the  idea  of  a  center  will  be  incomprehensible,  since  he 
possesses  no  idea  of  a  center. 

Having  no  idea  of  phenomena  proceeding  outside  of  the  plane — 
that  is,  out  of  his  "space" — the  plane  being  will  think  of  all  phe- 
nomena as  proceeding  on  his  plane  as  has  been  stated.    And  all 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  55 

phenomena  which  he  regards  as  proceeding  on  his  plane,  he  will 
consider  as  being  in  causal  interdependence  one  with  another: 
that  is,  he  will  think  that  one  phenomenon  is  the  effect  of  another 
which  has  happened  right  there,  and  the  cause  of  a  third  which  will 
happen  right  on  the  same  plane. 

If  a  multi-colored  cube  passes  through  the  plane,  the  plane 
being  will  perceive  the  entire  cube  and  its  motion  as  a  change  in 
the  color  of  lines  lying  in  the  plane.  Thus,  if  a  blue  line  replaces 
a  red  one,  then  the  plane  being  will  regard  the  red  line  as  a  past 
event.  He  will  not  be  in  a  position  to  realize  the  idea  that  the  red 
line  is  still  existing  somewhere.  He  will  say  that  the  line  is  single, 
but  that  it  becomes  blue  as  a  consequence  of  certain  causes  of  a 
physical  character.  If  the  cube  moves  backward  so  that  the  red 
line  appears  again  after  the  blue  one,  then  for  the  two-dimensional 
being  this  will  constitute  a  new  phenomenon.  He  will  say  that  the 
line  became  red  again. 

For  the  being  living  on  a  plane,  everything  above  and  below 
(if  the  plane  be  horizontal),  and  on  the  right  or  left  (if  the  plane 
be  vertical)  will  be  existing  in  time,  in  the  past  and  in  the  future : 
that  which  in  reality  is  located  outside  of  the  plane  will  be  re- 
garded as  non-existent,  either  as  that  which  is  already  past,  i.e., as 
something  which  has  disappeared,  ceased  to  be,  will  never  return, 
or  as  in  the  future,  i.  е.,  as  not  existent,  not  manifested,  as  a  thing 
in  potentiality.  

Let  us  imagine  that  a  wheel  with  the  spokes  painted  different 
colors  is  rotating  through  the  plane  upon  which  the  plane-being 
lives.  To  such  a  being  all  the  motion  of  the  wheel  will  appear  as 
a  variation  of  the  color  of  the  line  of  intersection  of  the  wheel  and 
the  plane.  The  plane  being  will  call  this  variation  of  the  color  of 
the  line  a  phenomenon,  and  observing  these  phenomena  he  will 
notice  in  them  a  certain  succession.  He  will  know  that  the  black 
line  is  followed  by  the  white  one,  the  white  by  the  blue,  the 
blue  by  the  red,  and  so  on.  If  simultaneously  with  the  appearance 
of  the  white  line  some  other  phenomenon  occurs— say  the  ringing 
of  a  bell— the  two-dimensional  being  will  say  that  the  white  line 
is  the  cause  of  that  ringing.  The  change  of  the  color  of  the  lines, 
in  the  opinion  of  the  two-dimensional  being,  will  depend  on  causes 
lying  right  in  his  plane.  Any  presupposition  of  the  possibility  of 
the  existence  of  causes  lying  outside  of  the  plane  he  will  characterize 


56  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

as  fantastic  and  entirely  unscientific.  It  will  seem  so  to  him  be- 
cause he  will  never  be  in  a  position  to  represent  the  wheel  to 
himself,  i.  е.,  the  parts  of  the  wheel  on  both  sides  of  the  plane. 
After  a  rough  study  of  the  color  of  the  lines,  and  knowing  the 
order  of  their  sequence,  the  plane  being,  perceiving  one  of  them, 
say  the  blue  one,  will  think  that  the  black  and  the  white  ones  have 
already  passed,  i.  е.,  disappeared,  ceased  to  exist,  gone  into  the 
past;  and  that  those  lines  which  have  not  yet  appeared — the  yel- 
low, the  green,  and  so  on,  and  the  new  white  and  black  ones  still 
to  come — do  not  yet  exist,  but  lie  in  the  future. 

Therefore,  though  not  conceiving  the  form  of  his  universe,  and 
regarding  it  as  infinite  in  all  directions,  the  plane  being  will  never- 
theless involuntarily  think  of  the  past  as  situated  somewhere  at 
one  side  of  all,  and  of  the  future  as  somewhere  at  the  other  side  of 
this  totality.  In  such  manner  will  the  plane  being  conceive  of  the 
idea  of  time.  We  see  that  this  idea  arises  because  the  two-dimen- 
sional being  senses  only  two  out  of  three  dimensions  of  space;  the 
third  dimension  he  senses  only  after  its  effects  become  manifest 
upon  the  plane,  and  therefore  he  regards  it  as  something  different 
from  the  first  two  dimensions  of  space,  calling  it  time. 


Now  let  us  imagine  that  through  the  plane  upon  which  the  two- 
dimensional  being  lives,  two  wheels  with  multi-colored  spokes  are 
rotating  and  are  rotating  in  opposite  directions.  The  spokes  of 
one  wheel  come  from  above  and  go  below;  the  spokes  of  the  other 
come  from  below  and  go  above. 

The  plane  being  will  never  notice  it. 

He  will  never  notice  that  where  for  one  line  (which  he  sees) 
there  lies  the  past — for  another  line  there  lies  the  future.  This 
thought  will  never  even  come  into  his  head,  because  he  will  con- 
ceive of  the  past  and  the  future  very  confusedly,  regarding  them 
as  concepts,  not  as  actual  facts.  But  at  the  same  time  he  will  be 
firmly  convinced  that  the  past  goes  in  one  direction,  and  the  future 
in  another.  Therefore  it  will  seem  to  him  a  wild  absurdity  that  on 
one  side  something  past  and  something  future  can  lie  together,  and 
on  another  side — and  also  beside  these  two — something  future  and 
something  past.  To  the  plane  being  the  idea  that  some  phenomena 
come  whence  others  go,  and  vice  versa,  will  seem  equally  absurd. 
He  will  tenaciously  think  that  the  future  is  that  wherefrom  every- 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  57 

thing  comes,  and  the  past  is  that  whereto  everything  goes  and 
wherefrom  nothing  returns.  He  will  be  totally  unable  to  under- 
stand that  events  may  arise  from  the  past  just  as  they  do  from  the 
future. 

Thus  we  see  that  the  plane  being  will  regard  the  changes  of 
color  of  the  lines  lying  on  the  plane  very  naively.  The  appear- 
ance of  different  spokes  he  will  regard  as  the  change  of  color  of  one 
and  the  same  line,  and  the  repeated  appearance  of  the  same  colored 
spoke  he  will  regard  every  time  as  a  new  appearance  of  a  given 
color. 

But  nevertheless,  having  noticed  periodicity  in  the  change  of 
the  color  of  the  lines  upon  the  surface,  having  remembered  the 
order  of  their  appearance,  and  having  learned  to  define  the  "time" 
of  the  appearance  of  certain  spokes  in  relation  to  some  other 
more  constant  phenomenon,  the  plane  being  will  be  in  a  posi- 
tion to  foretell  the  change  of  the  line  from  one  color  to  another. 
Thereupon  he  will  say  that  he  has  studied  this  phenomenon,  that 
he  can  apply  to  it  "the  mathematical  method" — can  "calculate 
it." 


If  we  ourselves  enter  the  world  of  plane-beings,  then  its  in- 
habitants will  sense  the  lines  limiting  the  sections  of  our  bodies. 
These  sections  will  be  for  them  living  beings;  they  will  not  know 
from  whence  they  appear,  why  they  alter,  or  whither  they  disap- 
pear in  such  a  miraculous  manner.  So  also,  the  sections  of  all  our  in- 
animate but  moving  objects  will  seem  independent  living  beings. 

If  the  consciousness  of  a  plane  being  should  suspect  our  exist- 
ence, and  should  come  into  some  sort  of  communion  with  our  con- 
sciousness, then  to  him  we  would  appear  as  higher,  omniscient, 
possibly  omnipotent,  but  above  all  incomprehensible  beings  of  a 
quite  inconceivable  category. 

We  could  see  his  world  just  as  it  is,  and  not  as  it  seems  to  him. 
We  could  see  the  past  and  the  future;  could  foretell,  direct 
and  even  create  events. 

We  could  know  the  very  substance  of  things — could  know  what 
"matter"  (the  straight  line)  is,  what  "motion"  (the  broken 
line,  the  curve,  the  angle)  is.  We  could  see  an  angle,  and  we  could 
see  a  center.  All  this  would  give  us  an  enormous  advantage  over 
the  two-dimensional  being. 


58  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

In  all  of  the  phenomena  of  the  world  of  the  two-dimensional 
being  we  could  see  considerably  more  than  he  sees — or  could  see 
quite  other  things  than  he. 

And  we  could  tell  him  very  much  that  was  new,  amazing,  and 
unexpected  about  the  phenomena  of  his  world — provided,  indeed, 
that  he  could  hear  us  and  understand  us. 

First  of  all  we  could  tell  him  that  what  he  regards  as  phe- 
nomena— angles  and  curves,  for  instance — are  properties  of  higher 
figures;  that  other  "phenomena"  of  his  world  are  not  phenomena, 
but  only  "parts"  or  "sections"  of  phenomena;  that  what  he  calls 
"solids"  are  only  sections  of  solids, — and  many  more  things  be- 
sides. 

We  should  be  able  to  tell  him  that  on  both  sides  of  his  plane 
(i.  е.,  of  his  space  or  ether)  lies  infinite  space  (which  the  plane 
being  calls  time) ;  and  that  in  this  space  lie  the  causes  of  all  his 
phenomena,  and  the  phenomena  themselves,  the  past  as  well  as 
the  future  ones;  moreover,  we  might  add  that  "phenomena"  them- 
selves are  not  something  happening  and  then  ceasing  to  be,  but 
combinations  of  properties  of  higher  solids. 

But  we  should  experience  considerable  difficulty  in  explaining 
anything  to  the  plane  being;  and  it  would  be  very  difficult  for  him 
to  understand  us.  First  of  all  it  would  be  difficult  because  he 
would  not  have  the  concepts  corresponding  to  our  concepts.  He 
would  lack  necessary  "words." 

For  instance,  "section" — this  would  be  for  him  a  quite  new 
and  inconceivable  word;  then  " angle"— again  an  inconceivable 
word;  "center" — still  more  inconceivable;  the  third  perpendicular 
— something  incomprehensible,  lying  outside  of  his  geometry. 

The  fallacy  of  his  conception  of  time  would  be  the  most  difficult 
thing  for  the  plane  being  to  understand.  He  could  never  under- 
stand that  that  which  has  passed  and  that  which  is  to  be  are  ex- 
isting simultaneously  on  the  lines  perpendicular  to  his  plane.  And 
he  could  never  conceive  the  idea  that  the  past  is  identical  with  the 
future,  because  phenomena  come  from  both  sides  and  go  in  both 
directions. 

But  the  most  diflScult  thing  for  the  plane  being  would  be  to 
conceive  the  idea  that  "time"  includes  in  itself  two  ideas:  the  idea 
of  space,  and  the  idea  of  motion  upon  this  space. 

We  have  shown  that  what  the  two-dimensional  being  living  on 
the  plane  calls  motion  has  for  us  quite  a  different  aspect. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  59 

In  his  book  "The  Fourth  Dimension,"  under  the  heading  "The 
First  Chapter  in  the  History  of  Four-space,"  Hinton  writes: 

Parmenides,  and  the  Asiatic  thinkers  with  whom  he  is  in  close 
affinity,  propound  a  theory  of  existence  which  is  in  close  accord  with  a 
conception  of  a  possible  relation  between  a  higher  and  lower  dimensional 
space.  .  .  It  is  one  which  in  all  ages  has  had  a  strong  attraction  for 
pure  intellect,  and  is  the  natural  mode  of  thought  for  those  who  refrain 
from  projecting  their  own  volition  into  nature  under  the  guise  of  causality. 

According  to  Parmenides  of  the  school  of  Elea  the  all  is  one,  unmov- 
ing  and  unchanging.  The  permanent  amid  the  transient — that  foothold 
for  thought,  that  solid  ground  for  feeling,  on  the  discovery  of  which 
depends  all  our  life — is  no  phantom;  it  is  the  image  amidst  deception  of 
true  being,  the  eternal,  the  unmoved,  the  one.    Thus  says  Parmenides. 

But  how  is  it  possible  to  explain  the  shifting  scene,  these  mutations  of 
things? 

"Illusion,"  answers  Parmenides.  Distinguishing  between  truth  and 
error,  he  tells  of  the  true  doctrine  of  the  one — the  false  opinion  of  a 
changing  world.  He  is  no  less  memorable  for  the  manner  of  his  advo- 
cacy than  for  the  cause  he  advocates. 

Can  the  mind  conceive  a  more  delightful  intellectual  picture  than 
that  of  Parmenides  pointing  to  the  one,  the  true,  the  unchanging,  and 
yet  on  the  other  hand  ready  to  discuss  all  manner  of  false  opinion !     .     . 

In  support  of  the  true  opinion  he  proceeded  by  the  negative  way  of 
showing  the  self-contradictions  in  the  ideas  of  change  and  motion.  .  . 
To  express  his  doctrine  in  the  ponderous  modern  way  we  must  make 
the  statement  that  motion  is  phenomenal,  not  real. 

Let  us  represent  his  doctrine. 

Imagine  a  sheet  of  still  water  into  which  a  slanting  stick  is  being 
lowered  with  a  motion  vertically  downwards.  Let  1,  2,  3,  (Fig.  1),  be 
three  consecutive  positions  of  the  stick.  А,  В,  С  will  be  three  con- 
nective positions  of  the  meeting  of  the  stick  with  the  surface  of  the 
water.  As  the  stick  passes  down,  the  meeting  will  move  from  A  on  to 
В  and  C. 

Suppose  now  all  the  water  to  be  removed  except  a  film.  At  the 
meeting  of  the  film  and  the  stick  there  will  be  an  interruption  of  the 
film.  If  we  suppose  the  film  to  have  a  property,  like  that  of  a  soap  bub- 
ble, of  closing  up  round  any  penetrating  object,  then  as  the  stick  goes 
vertically  downwards  the  interruption  in  the  film  will  move  on.  If  we 
pass  a  spiral  through  the  film  the  intersection  will  give  a  point  moving 
in  a  circle  (shown  by  the  dotted  lines  in  Fig.  2). 

For  the  plane  being  such  a  point,  moving  in  a  circle  in  its  plane,  would 
probably  constitute  a  cosmical  phenomenon,  something  like  the  motion 
of  a  planet  in  its  orbit. 

Suppose  now  the  spiral  to  be  still  and  the  film  to  move  vertically 
upward,  the  whole  spiral  will  be  represented  in  the  film  in  the  con- 
secutive positions  of  the  point  of  intersection.* 

*  С.  H.  Hinton,  "The  Fourth  Dimension,"  pp.  23,  24  and  25. 
t  Ibid. 


60 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM 


If  instead  of  one  spiral  we  take  a  complicated  construction  consisting 
of  spirals,  inclined,  and  straight  lines,  broken  and  curved  lines,  and 
if  the  film  move  vertically  upwards  we  shall  have  an  entire  universe  of 
moving  points  the  movements  of  which  will  appear  to  the  plane  being 
as  original. 


Fig.  1 


Fig.  2 


The  plane  being  will  explain  these  movements  as  depending  one  upon 
another,  and  indeed  he  will  never  happen  to  think  that  these  move- 
ments are  fictitious  and  are  dependent  upon  the  spirals  and  other  lines 
lying  outside  his  space.f 

Returning  to  the  plane  being  and  his  perception  of  the  world, 
and  analyzing  his  relations  to  the  three-dimensional  world,  we  see 
that  for  the  two-dimensional  or  plane  being  it  will  be  very  diffi- 
cult to  understand  all  the  complexity  of  the  phenomena  of  our 
world,  as  it  appears  to  us.  He  (the  plane  being)  is  accustomed  to 
perceive  the  world  as  being  too  simple. 

Taking  into  consideration  the  sections  of  figures  instead  of  the 
figures  themselves,  the  plane  being  will  compare  them  in  relation 
to  their  length  and  their  greater  or  lesser  curvature,  i.  е.,  their  for 
him  more  or  less  rapid  motion. 

The  differences  between  the  objects  of  our  world,  as  they  exist 
for  us  he  would  not  understand.  The  functions  of  the  objects  of 
our  world  would  be  completely  mysterious  to  his  mind — incom- 
prehensible, "supernatural." 

Let  us  imagine  that  a  coin,  and  a  candle  the  diameter  of  which 
is  equal  to  that  of  the  coin,  are  on  the  plane  upon  which  the  two- 
dimensional  being  lives.  To  the  plane  being  they  will  seem  two 
equal  circles,  i.  е.,  two  moving,  and  absolutely  identical  lines;  he  will 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  61 

never  discover  any  difference  between  them.  The  functions  of  the 
coin  and  of  the  candle  in  our  world — these  are  for  him  absolutely 
a  terra  incognita.  If  we  try  to  imagine  what  an  enormous  evolu- 
tion the  plane  being  must  pass  through  in  order  to  understand  the 
function  of  the  coin  and  of  the  candle  and  the  difference  between 
these  functions,  we  will  understand  the  nature  of  the  division  be- 
tween the  plane  world  and  the  world  of  three  dimensions,  and  the 
complete  impossibility  of  even  imagining,  on  the  plane,  anything 
at  all  like  the  three-dimensional  world,  with  its  manifoldness  of 
function. 

The  properties  of  the  phenomena  of  the  plane  world  will  be 
extremely  monotonous;  they  will  differ  by  the  order  of  their  ap- 
pearance, their  duration,  and  their  periodicity.  Solids,  and  the 
things  of  this  world  will  be  flat  and  uniform,  like  shadows,  i.  е.,  like 
the  shadows  of  quite  different  solids,  which  seem  to  us  uniform. 
Even  if  the  plane  being  could  come  in  contact  with  our  conscious- 
ness, he  would  never  be  in  a  position  to  understand  all  the  mani- 
foldness and  richness  of  the  phenomena  of  our  world  and  the 
variety  of  function  of  the  things  of  that  world. 

Plane  beings  would  not  be  in  a  position  to  master  our  most 
ordinary  concepts. 

It  would  be  extremely  difficult  for  them  to  understand  that 
phenomena,  identical  for  them,  are  in  reality  different;  and  on  the 
other  hand,  that  phenomena  quite  separate  for  them  are  in  reality 
parts  of  one  great  phenomenon,  and  even  of  one  object  or  one 
being. 

This  last  will  be  one  of  the  most  difficult  things  for  the  plane 
being  to  understand.  If  we  imagine  our  plane  being  to  be  inhabit- 
ing a  horizontal  plane,  intersecting  the  top  of  a  tree,  and  parallel 
to  the  surface  of  the  earth,  then  for  such  a  being  each  of  the  vari- 
ous sections  of  the  branches  will  appear  as  a  quite  separate  phe- 
nomenon or  object.  The  idea  of  the  tree  and  its  branches  will 
never  occur  to  him. 

Generally  speaking,  the  understanding  of  the  most  fundamental 
and  simple  things  of  our  world  will  be  infinitely  long  and  difficult 
to  the  plane  being.  He  would  have  to  entirely  reconstruct  his 
concepts  of  space  and  time.  This  would  be  the  first  step.  Unless 
it  is  taken,  nothing  is  accomplished.  Until  the  plane  being  will 
imagine  all  our  universe  as  existing  in  time,  i.  е.,  until  he  refers  to 
time  everything  lying  on  both  sides  of  his  plane,  he  will  never 


62  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

understand  anything.  In  order  to  begin  to  understand  "the  third 
dimension"  the  inhabitant  of  the  plane  must  conceive  of  his  time 
concepts  spatially,  that  is,  translate  his  time  into  space. 

To  achieve  even  the  spark  of  a  true  understanding  of  our  world 
he  will  have  to  reconstruct  completely  all  his  ideas — to  r evaluate  all 
values,  to  revise  all  concepts,  to  dissever  the  uniting  concepts,  to 
unite  those  which  are  dissevered;  and,  what  is  most  important,  to 
create  an  infinite  number  of  new  ones. 

If  we  put  down  the  five  fingers  of  one  hand  on  the  plane  of  the 
two-dimensional  being  they  will  be  for  him  five  separate  phe- 
nomena. 

Let  us  try  to  imagine  what  an  enormous  mental  evolution  he 
would  have  to  undergo  in  order  to  understand  that  these  five 
separate  phenomena  on  his  plane  are  the  finger-tips  of  the  hand  of 
a  large,  active  and  intelligent  being — man. 

To  make  out,  step  by  step,  how  the  plane  being  would  attain 
to  an  understanding  of  our  world,  lying  in  the  region  of  the  to  him 
mysterious  third  dimension — i.  е.,  partly  in  the  past,  partly  in  the 
future — would  be  interesting  in  the  highest  degree.  First  of  all, 
in  order  to  understand  the  world  of  three  dimensions,  he  must 
cease  to  be  two  dimensional — he  must  become  three  dimensional 
himself  or,  in  other  words,  he  must  feel  an  interest  in  the  life  of 
three-dimensional  space.  After  having  felt  the  interest  of  this 
life,  he  will  by  so  doing  transcend  his  plane,  and  will  never  be  in  a 
position  thereafter  to  return  to  it.  Entering  more  and  more  within 
the  circle  of  ideas  and  concepts  which  were  entirely  incomprehen- 
sible to  him  before,  he  will  have  already  become,  not  two-dimen- 
sional, but  three-dimensional.  But  all  along  the  plane  being  will 
have  been  essentially  three-dimensional,  that  is,  he  will  have  had 
the  third  dimension,  without  his  being  conscious  of  it  himself. 
To  become  three-dimensional  he  must  be  three-dimensional.  Then 
as  the  end  of  ends  he  can  address  himself  to  the  self-liberation 
from  the  illusion  of  the  two-dimensionality  of  himself  and  the 
world,  and  to  the  apprehension  of  the  three-dimensional  world. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

The  imDOSsibility  of  the  mathematical  definition  of  dimensions.  Why 
ТЬе  К  not  mathematics  sense  dimensions?  The  entire  cond^onahty 
of  the  representation  of  dimensions  by  powers  The  possibility  of 
Representing  all  powers  on  a  line.  Kant  and  b°bachevAjN  The 
difference  between  non-Euclidian  geometry  andmetageometry 
Where  shall  we  find  the  explanation  of  the  three-dimensionality  of 
the  world,  if  Kant's  ideas  are  true?  Are  not  the  conditions  of  the 
three-dimensionality  of  the  world  confined  to  our  receptive  appa- 
ratus, to  our  psyche? 

'OW  that  we  have  studied  those   "relations   which 
our  space  itself  bears  within  it"  we  shall  return  to 
the  questions:  But  what  in  reality  do  the  dimensions 
of  space  represent? —and  why  are  there  three  of  them?  _ 
The  fact  that  it  is  impossible  to  define  three-di- 
mensionality mathematically  must  appear  most  strange. 

We  are  little  conscious  of  this,  and  it  seems  to  us  a  paradox, 
because  we  speak  of  the  dimensions  of  space,  but  it  remains  a  fact 
that  mathematics  does  not  sense  the  dimensions  of  space.  _ 

The  question  arises,  how  can  such  a  fine  instrument  of  analysis 
as  mathematics  not  feel  dimensions,  if  they  represent  some  real 
properties  of  space.  . 

Speaking  of  mathematics,  it  is  necessary  to  recognize  nrst  of  all, 
as  a  fundamental  premise,  that  correspondent  to  each  mathematical 
expression  is  always  the  relation  of  some  realities. 

If  there  is  no  such  a  thing,  if  it  be  not  true— then  there  is  no 
mathematics.  This  is  its  principal  substance,  its  principal  con- 
tents. To  express  the  correlations  of  magnitudes,  such  is  the 
problem  of  mathematics.  But  these  correlations  shall  be  between 
something.  Instead  of  algebraical  a,  b  and  с  it  must  be  possible 
to  substitute  some  reality.  This  is  the  ABC  of  all  mathematics; 
a,  b  and  c— these  are  credit  bills,  they  can  be  good  ones  only  if 
behind  them  there  is  a  real  something,  and  they  can  be  counter- 
feited if  behind  them  there  is  no  reality  whatever. 

63 


64  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

"Dimensions"  play  here  a  very  strange  role.  If  we  designate 
them  by  the  algebraic  symbols  a,  b  and  c,  they  have  the  character 
of  counterfeit  credit  bills.  For  this  a,  b  and  с  it  is  impossible  to 
substitute  any  real  magnitudes  which  are  capable  of  expressing 
the  correlations  of  dimensions. 

Usually  dimensions  are  represented  by  powers:  the  first,  the 
second,  the  third;  that  is,  if  a  line  is  called  a,  then  a  square,  the 
sides  of  which  are  equal  to  this  line,  is  called  a2,  and  a  cube,  the 
face  of  which  is  equal  to  this  square,  is  called  a3. 

This  among  other  things  gave  Hinton  the  foundation  on  which 
he  constructed  his  theory  of  lesser  acts,  four-dimensional  solids — a4. 
But  this  is  "belles  lettres"  of  the  purest  sort.  First  of  all,  because 
the  representation  of  "dimensions"  by  powers  is  entirely  condi- 
tional. It  is  possible  to  represent  all  powers  on  a  line.  For  exam- 
ple, take  the  segment  of  a  line  equal  to  five  millimeters;  then  a 
segment  equal  to  twenty-five  millimeters  will  be  the  square  of  it, 
i.  е.,  a2;  and  a  segment  of  one  hundred  and  twenty-five  milli- 
meters will  be  the  cube — a3. 

How  shall  we  understand  that  mathematics  does  not  feel  dimen- 
sions— that  it  is  impossible  to  express  mathematically  the  differ- 
ence between  dimensions? 

<It  is  possible  to  understand  and  explain  it  by  one  thing  only — 
namely,  that  this  difference  does  not  exist. 
We  really  know  that  all  three  dimensions  are  in  substance  iden- 
tical, that  it  is  possible  to  regard  each  of  the  three  dimensions 
either  as  following  the  sequence,  the  first,  the  second,  the  third,  or 
the  other  way  about.  This  alone  proves  that  dimensions  are  not 
mathematical  magnitudes.  All  the  real  properties  of  a  thing  can 
be  expressed  mathematically  as  quantities,  i.  е.,  numbers,  show- 
ing the  relation  of  these  properties  to  other  properties. 

But  in  the  matter  of  dimensions  it  is  as  though  mathematics 
sees  more  than  we  do,  or  farther  than  we  do,  through  some  bound- 
aries which  arrest  us  but  not  it— and  sees  that  no  realities  what- 
ever correspond  to  our  concepts  of  dimensions. 

If  the  three  dimensions  really  corresponded  to  three  powers, 
then  we  would  have  the  right  to  say  that  only  these  three  powers 
refer  to  geometry,  and  that  all  the  other  higher  powers,  beginning 
with  the  fourth,  lie  beyond  geometry. 

But  even  this  is  denied  us.  The  representation  of  dimensions  by 
powers  is  perfectly  arbitrary. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  65 

More  accurately,  geometry,  from  the  standpoint  of  mathe- 
matics, is  an  artificial  system  for  the  solving  of  problems  based 
on  conditional  data,  deduced,  probably,  from  the  properties  of 
our  psyche. 

The  system  of  investigation  of  "higher  space"  Hinton  calls 
metageometry,  and  with  metageometry  he  connects  the  names  of 
Lobachevsky,  Gauss,  and  other  investigators  of  non-Euclidian 
geometry. 

We  shall  now  consider  in  what  relation  the  questions  touched 
upon  by  us  stand  to  the  theories  of  these  scientists. 

Hinton  deduces  his  ideas  from  Kant  and  Lobachevsky. 

Others,  on  the  contrary,  place  Kant's  ideas  in  opposition  to 
those  of  Lobachevsky.  Thus  Roberto  Bonola,  in  "Non-Euclidian 
Geometry,"  declares  that  Lobachevsky's  conception  of  space  is 
contrary  to  that  of  Kant.    He  says: 

The  Kantian  doctrine  considered  space  as  a  subjective  intuition,  a 
necessary  presupposition  of  every  experience.  Lobachevsky's  doctrine 
was  rather  allied  to  sensualism  and  the  current  empiricism,  and  compelled 
geometry  to  take  its  place  again  among  the  experimental  sciences.* 

Which  of  these  views  is  true,  and  in  what  relation  do  Lobachev- 
sky's ideas  stand  to  our  problem?  The  correct  answer  to 
this  question  is:  in  no  relation.  Non-Euclidian  geometry  is  not 
metageometry,  and  non-Euclidian  geometry  stands  in  the  same 
relation  to  metageometry  as  Euclidian  geometry  itself. 

The  results  of  non-Euclidian  geometry,  which  have  submitted 
the  fundamental  axioms  of  Euclid  to  a  revaluation,  and  which 
have  found  the  most  complete  expression  in  the  works  of  Bolyai, 
Gauss,  and  Lobachevsky,  are  embraced  in  the  formula : 

The  axioms  of  a  given  geometry  express  the  properties  of  a  given 
space. 

Thus  geometry  on  the  plane  accepts  all  three  Euclidian  axioms, 
i.e.: 

1.  A  straight  line  is  the  shortest  distance  between  two  points. 

2.  Any  figure  may  be  transferred  into  another  position  without 

changing  its  properties. 

3.  Parallel  lines  do  not  meet. 

(This  last  axiom  is  formulated  differently  by  Euclid.) 

In  geometry  on  a  sphere,  or  on  a  concave  surface  the  first  two 

axioms  alone  are  true,  because  the  meridians  which  are  separated 

at  the  equator  meet  at  the  poles. 

♦Roberto  Bonola:  "Non-Euclidian  Geometry."  The  Open  Court  Publishing  Co.,  Chioago,  1912, 
pp.  92,  93. 


66  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

In  geometry  on  the  surface  of  irregular  curvature  only  the 
first  axiom  is  true — the  second,  regarding  the  transference  of 
figures,  is  impossible  because  the  figure  taken  in  one  part  of  an 
irregular  surface  can  change  when  transferred  into  another  place. 
Also,  the  sum  of  the  angles  of  a  triangle  can  be  either  more  or  less 
than  two  right  angles. 

Therefore,  axioms  express  the  difference  of  properties  of  various 
kinds  of  surfaces. 

A  geometrical  axiom  is  a  law  of  a  given  surface. 

But  what  is  a  surface? 

Lobachevsky's  merit  consists  in  that  he  found  it  necessary  to 
revise  the  fundamental  concepts  of  geometry.  But  he  never 
went  as  far  as  to  revalue  these  concepts  from  Kant's  standpoint. 
At  the  same  time  he  is  in  no  sense  contradictory  to  Kant.  A 
surface  in  the  mind  of  Lobachevsky,  as  a  geometrician,  was  only 
a  means  for  the  generalization  of  certain  properties  on  which  this 
or  that  geometrical  system  was  constructed,  or  the  generalization 
of  the  properties  of  certain  given  lines.  About  the  reality  or  the 
unreality  of  a  surface,  he  probably  never  thought. 

Thus  on  the  one  hand,  Bonola,  who  ascribed  to  Lobachevsky 
views  opposite  to  Kant,  and  their  nearness  to  "sensualism"  and 
"current  empiricism,"  is  quite  wrong,  while  on  the  other  hand, 
it  is  not  impossible  to  conceive  that  Hinton  entirely  subjectively 
ascribes  to  Gauss  and  Lobachevsky  their  inauguration  of  a  new 
era  in  philosophy. 

Non-Euclidian  geometry,  including  that  of  Lobachevsky,  has 
no  relation  to  metageometry  whatever. 

Lobachevsky  does  not  go  outside  of  the  three-dimensional 
sphere. 

Metageometry  regards  the  three-dimensional  sphere  as  a  section 
of  higher  space.  Among  mathematicians,  Riemann,  who  under- 
stood the  relation  of  time  to  space,  was  nearest  of  all  to  this  idea. 

The  point  of  three-dimensional  space  is  a  section  of  a  meta- 
geometrical  line.  It  is  impossible  to  generalize  on  any  surface 
whatever  the  lines  considered  in  metageometry.  Perhaps  this 
last  is  the  most  important  for  the  definition  of  the  difference  be- 
tween geometries  (Euclidian  and  non-Euclidian  and  metageom- 
etry). It  is  impossible  to  regard  metageometrical  lines  as  dis- 
tances between  points  in  our  space,  and  it  is  impossible  to  repre- 
sent them  as  forming  any  figures  in  our  space. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  67 

The  consideration  of  the  possible  properties  of  lines  lying  out 
of  our  space,  the  relation  of  these  lines  and  their  angles  to  the 
lines,  angles,  surfaces  and  solids  of  our  geometry,  forms  the  sub- 
ject of  metageometry. 

The  investigators  of  non-Euclidian  geometry  could  not  bring 
themselves  to  reject  the  consideration  of  surfaces.  There  is  some- 
thing almost  tragic  in  this.  See  what  surfaces  Beltrami  invented 
in  his  investigations  of  non-Euclidian  geometry* — one  of  his 
surfaces  resembles  the  surface  of  a  ventilator,  another,  the  surface 
of  a  funnel.  But  he  could  not  decide  to  reject  the  surface,  to  cast 
it  aside  once  and  for  all,  to  imagine  that  the  line  can  be  independent 
of  the  surface,  i.  е.,  a  series  of  lines  which  are  parallel  or  nearly  par- 
allel cannot  be  generalized  on  any  surface,  or  even  in  three- 
dimensional  space. 

And  because  of  this,  both  he  and  many  other  geometers,  de- 
veloping non-Euclidian  geometry,  could  not  transcend  the  three- 
dimensional  world. 

Mechanics  recognizes  the  line  in  time,  i.  е.,  such  a  line  as  it  is  im- 
possible by  any  means  to  imagine  upon  the  surface,  or  as  the  dis- 
tance between  the  two  points  of  space.  This  line  is  taken  into 
consideration  in  the  calculations  pertaining  to  machines.  But 
geometry  never  touched  this  line,  and  dealt  always  with  its  sections 
only. 

Now  it  is  possible  to  return  to  the  question:  what  is  space?  and 
to  discover  if  the  answer  to  this  question  has  been  found. 

The  answer  would  be  the  exact  definition  and  explanation  of 
the  three-dimensionality  of  space  as  a  property  of  the  world. 

But  this  is  not  the  answer.  The  three-dimensionality  of  space  as 
an  objective  phenomenon  remains  just  as  enigmatical  and  incon- 
ceivable as  before.  In  relation  to  three-dimensionality  it  is  neces- 
sary: 

Either  to  accept  it  as  a  thing  given,  and  to  add  this  to  the  two 
data  which  we  established  in  the  beginning: 

Or  to  recognize  the  fallacy  of  all  objective  methods  of  reason- 
ing, and  return  to  another  method,  outlined  in  the  beginning  of 
the  book. 

Then,  on  the  basis  of  the  two  fundamental  data,  the  world  and 
consciousness,  it  is  necessary  to  establish  whether  three-dimen- 

*  In  the  Russian  edition  of  Tertium  Organum,  Ouspenaky  ascribed  the  surfaces  shown  on  pp.  132  and 
133  of  Bonola's  Non-Enclidian  Geometry  to  Lobachevsky,  which  is  obviously  a  slip  of  the  pen.  These 
surfaces  were  discussed  by  Beltrami,  who  gave  a  new  interpretation  to  Lobachevskian  geometry.  Transl. 


68  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

sional  space  is  a  property  of  the  world,  or  a  property  of  our  knowledge 
of  the  world. 

Beginning  with  Kant,  who  affirms  that  space  is  a  property  of 
the  receptivity  of  the  world  by  our  consciousness,  I  intentionally 
deviated  far  from  this  idea  and  regarded  space  as  a  property  of  the 
world. 

Along  with  Hinton,  I  postulated  that  our  space  itself  bears 
within  it  the  relations  which  permit  us  to  establish  its  relations  to 
higher  space,  and  on  the  foundation  of  this  postulate  I  built  a 
whole  series  of  analogies  which  somewhat  clarified  for  us  the 
problems  of  space  and  time  and  their  mutual  co-relations;  but 
which,  as  was  said,  did  not  explain  anything  concerning  the 
principal  question  of  the  causes  of  the  three-dimensionality  of  space. 

The  method  of  analogies  is,  generally  speaking,  a  rather  tor- 
menting thing.  With  it,  you  walk  in  a  vicious  circle.  It  helps  you 
to  elucidate  certain  things,  and  the  relations  of  certain  things,  but 
in  substance  it  never  gives  a  direct  answer  to  anything.  After 
many  and  long  attempts  to  analyze  complex  problems  by  the  aid 
of  the  method  of  analogies,  you  feel  the  uselessness  of  all  your 
efforts;  you  feel  that  you  are  walking  alongside  of  a  wall.  And 
then  you  begin  to  experience  simply  a  hatred  and  aversion  for 
analogies,  and  you  find  it  necessary  to  search  in  the  direct  way 
which  leads  where  you  need  to  go. 

The  problem  of  higher  dimensions  has  usually  been  analyzed 
by  the  method  of  analogies,  and  only  very  lately  has  science  begun 
to  elaborate  that  direct  method,  which  will  be  shown  later  on. 

If  we  desire  to  go  straight,  without  deviating,  we  shall  keep 
strictly  up  to  the  fundamental  propositions  of  Kant.  But  if  we 
formulate  Hinton's  above  mentioned  thought  from  the  point  of 
view  of  these  propositions,  it  will  be  as  follows :  We  bear  within  our- 
selves the  conditions  of  our  space,  and  therefore  within  ourselves  we 
shall  find  the  conditions  which  will  permit  us  to  establish  correlations 
between  our  space  and  higher  space. 

In  other  words,  we  shall  find  the  conditions  of  the  three-dimen- 
sionality of  the  world  in  our  psyche,  in  our  receptive  apparatus — 
and  shall  find  exactly  there  the  conditions  of  the  possibility  of  the 
higher  dimensional  world. 

Propounding  the  problem  in  this  way,  we  put  ourselves  upon 
the  direct  path,  and  we  shall  receive  an  answer  to  our  question, 
what  is  space  and  its  three-dimensionality? 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  69 

How  may  we  approach  the  solution  of  this  problem? 

Plainly,  by  studying  our  consciousness  and  its  properties. 

We  shall  free  ourselves  from  any  analogies,  and  shall  enter  upon 
the  correct  and  direct  path  toward  the  solution  of  the  fundamental 
question  about  the  objectivity  or  subjectivity  of  space,  if  we  shall 
decide  to  study  the  psychical  forms  by  which  we  perceive  the 
world,  and  to  discover  if  there  does  not  exist  a  correspondence  be- 
tween them  and  the  three-dimensionality  of  the  world — that  is,  if 
the  three-dimensional  extension  of  space,  with  its  properties,  does 
not  result  from  properties  of  the  psyche  which  are  known  to  us. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

Our  receptive  apparatus.  Sensation.  Perception.  Conception.  In- 
tuition. Art  as  the  language  of  the  future.  To  what  extent  does 
the  three-dimensionality  of  the  world  depend  upon  the  properties 
of  our  receptive  apparatus?  What  might  prove  this  interdepend- 
ence? Where  may  we  6nd  the  real  affirmation  of  this  interdepend- 
ence? The  animal  psyche.  In  what  does  it  differ  from  the  human? 
ReBex  action.  The  irritability  of  the  cell.  Instinct.  Pleasure- 
pain.  Emotional  thinking.  The  absence  of  concepts.  Language  of 
animals.  Logic  of  animals.  Different  degrees  of  psychic  develop- 
ment in  animals.    The  goose,  the  cat,  the  dog  and  the  monkey. 

tN  order  exactly  to  define  the  relation  of  our  I  to  the  ex- 
ternal world,  and  to  determine  what,  in  our  receptivity 
of  the  world,  belongs  to  it,  and  what  belongs  to  ourselves, 
let  us  turn  to  elementary  psychology  and  examine  the 
mechanism  of  our  receptive  apparatus. 
The  fundamental  unit  of  our  receptivity  is  a  sensation. 
This  sensation  is  an  elementary  change  in  the  state  of  conscious- 
ness, produced,  as  it  seems  to  us,  either  by  some  change  in  the  state 
of  the  external  world  in  relation  to  our  consciousness,  or  by  a 
change  in  the  state  of  our  consciousness  in  relation  to  the  external 
world.  Such  is  the  teaching  of  physics  and  psycho-physics.  Into 
the  consideration  of  the  correctness  or  incorrectness  of  the  con- 
struction of  these  sciences  I  shall  not  enter.  Suffice  it  to  define 
a  sensation  as  an  elementary  change  in  the  state  of  consciousness 
—as  the  element,  that  is,  as  the  fundamental  unit  of  this  change. 
Feeling  the  sensation  we  assume  that  it  appears,  so  to  speak,  as 
the  reflection  of  some  change  in  the  external  world. 

The  sensations  felt  by  us  leave  a  certain  trace  in  our  memory. 
The  accumulating  memories  of  sensations  begin  to  blend  in  con- 
sciousness into  groups,  and  according  to  their  similitude,  tend  to  asso- 
ciate, to  sum  up,  to  be  opposed;  the  sensations  which  are  usually 
felt  in  close  connection  with  one  another  will  arise  in  memory  in 
the  same  connection.  Gradually,  out  of  the  memories  of  sensa- 
tions, perceptions  are  compounded.  Perceptions — these  are  so  to 
speak  the  group  memories  of  sensations.    During  the  compound- 

71 


72  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

ing  of  perceptions,  sensations  are  polarizing  in  two  clearly  defined 
directions.  The  first  direction  of  this  grouping  will  be  according 
to  the  character  of  the  sensations.  (The  sensations  of  a  yellow  color 
will  combine  with  the  sensations  of  a  yellow  color;  sensations  of  a 
sour  taste  with  those  of  a  sour  taste) .  The  second  direction  will 
be  according  to  the  time  of  the  reception  of  sensations.  When  various 
sensations,  constituting  a  single  group,  and  compounding  one 
perception,  enter  simultaneously,  then  the  memory  of  this  definite 
group  of  sensations  is  ascribed  to  a  common  cause.  This  "  common 
cause"  is  projected  into  the  outside  world  as  the  object,  and  it  is 
assumed  that  the  given  perception  itself  reflects  the  real  properties 
of  this  object.  Such  group  remembrance  constitutes  perception, 
the  perception,  for  example,  of  a  tree — that  tree.  Into  this  group 
enter  the  green  color  of  the  leaves,  their  smell,  their  shadows, 
their  rustle  in  the  wind,  etc.  All  these  things  taken  together  form 
as  it  were  a  focus  of  rays  coming  out  of  consciousness,  gradually 
concentrated  upon  the  outside  object  and  coinciding  with  it  either 
well  or  ill. 

In  the  further  complication  of  the  psychical  life,  the  memories 
of  perceptions  proceed  as  with  the  memories  of  sensations.  Min- 
gling together,  the  memories  of  perceptions,  or  the  "images  of 
perceptions,"  combine  in  various  ways:  they  sum  up,  they  stand 
opposed,  they  form  groups,  and  in  the  end  give  rise  to  concepts. 

Thus  out  of  various  sensations,  experienced  (in  groups)  at 
different  times,  a  child  gets  the  perception  of  a  tree  (that  tree), 
and  afterwards,  out  of  the  images  of  perceptions  of  different 
trees  there  emerges  the  concept  of  a  tree,  i.  е.,  not  "that  tree," 
but  trees  in  general. 


The  formation  of  perceptions  leads  to  the  formation  of  words, 
and  the  appearance  of  speech. 

The  beginning  of  speech  may  appear  on  the  lowest  level  of 
psychic  life,  during  the  period  of  living  by  sensations,  and  it 
will  become  more  complex  during  the  period  of  living  by  per- 
ceptions; but  unless  there  be  concepts  it  will  not  be  speech  in 
the  true  meaning  of  the  word. 

On  the  lower  levels  of  psychic  life  certain  sensations  can  be 
expressed  by  certain  sounds.  Therefore  it  is  possible  to  express 
common  impressions  of  horror,  anger,  pleasure.     These  sounds 


TERTITJM   ORGANUM  73 

may  serve  as  signals  of  danger,  as  commands,  demands,  threats, 
etc,  but  it  is  impossible  to  say  much  by  means  of  them. 

In  the  further  development  of  speech,  if  words  or  sounds 
express  perceptions,  as  in  the  case  of  children,  this  means  that  the 
given  sound  or  the  given  word  designates  only  that  object  to  which 
it  refers.  For  each  new  similar  object  must  exist  another  new 
sound,  or  a  new  word.  If  the  speaker  designates  different  objects 
by  one  and  the  same  sound  or  word,  it  means  that  in  his  opinion 
the  objects  are  the  same,  or  that  knowingly  he  is  calling  different 
objects  by  the  same  name.  In  either  case  it  will  be  difficult  to 
understand  him,  and  such  speech  cannot  serve  as  an  example  of 
clear  speech.  For  instance,  if  a  child  call  a  tree  by  a  certain  sound 
or  word,  having  in  view  that  tree  only,  and  not  knowing  other 
trees  at  all,  then  any  new  tree  which  he  may  see  he  will  call  by  a 
new  word,  or  else  he  will  take  it  for  the  same  tree.  The  speech 
in  which  "words"  correspond  to  perceptions  is  as  it  were  made  up 
of  proper  nouns.  There  are  no  appellative  nouns;  and  not  only 
substantives,  but  verbs,  adjectives  and  adverbs;  all  have  the 
character  of  "proper  nouns;"  that  is,  they  apply  to  a  given  action, 
to  a  given  quality,  or  to  a  given  property. 

The  appearance  of  words  of  a  common  meaning  in  human  speech 
signifies  the  appearance  of  concepts  in  consciousness. 

Speech  consists  of  words,  each  word  expressing  a  concept.  Con- 
cept and  word  are  in  substance  one  and  the  same  thing;  only  the 
first  (the  concept)  represents,  so  to  speak,  the  inner  side,  and  the 
second  (the  word)  the  outer  side.  Or,  as  says  Dr.  R.  M.  Bucke 
(the  author  of  the  book  "Cosmic  Consciousness,"  about  which  I 
shall  have  much  to  say  later  on),  "A  word  (i.  е.,  concept)  is  the 
algebraical  sign  of  a  thing." 

It  has  been  noticed  thousands  of  times  that  the  brain  of  a  thinking 
man  does  not  exceed  in  size  the  brain  of  a  non-thinking  wild  man  in 
anything  like  the  proportion  in  which  the  mind  of  the  thinker  exceeds 
the  mind  of  the  savage.  The  reason  is  that  the  brain  of  a  Herbert  Spencer 
has  very  little  more  work  to  do  than  has  the  brain  of  a  native  Australian, 
for  this  reason,  that  Spencer  does  all  his  characteristic  mental  work  by 
signs  or  counters  which  stand  for  concepts,  while  the  savage  does  all  or 
nearly  all  his  by  means  of  cumbersome  recepts.  The  savage  is  in  a  posi- 
tion comparable  to  that  of  the  astronomer  who  makes  his  calculations 
by  arithmetic,  while  Spencer  is  in  the  position  of  one  who  makes  them 
by  algebra.  The  first  will  fill  many  great  sheets  of  paper  with  figures 
and  go  through  immense  labor;  the  other  will  make  the  same  calcula- 
tions on  an  envelope  and  with  comparatively  little  mental  work.* 

*  R.  M.  Bucke.    "Cosmic  Consciousness,"  p.  12. 


74  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

In  our  speech  words  express  concepts  or  ideas.  By  ideas  are 
meant  broader  concepts,  not  representing  the  group  sign  of  sim- 
ilar perceptions,  but  embracing  various  groups  of  perceptions,  or 
even  groups  of  concepts.  Therefore  an  idea  is  a  complex  or  an 
abstract  concept. 

In  addition  to  the  simple  sensations  of  the  sense  organs  (color, 
sound,  touch,  smell  and  taste) ,  in  addition  to  the  simple  emotions 
of  pleasure,  pain,  joy,  anger,  surprise,  wonder,  curiosity  and  many 
others,  there  is  passing  through  our  consciousness  a  series  of  com- 
plex sensations  and  higher  (complex)  emotions  (moral,  esthetic, 
religious) .  The  content  of  emotional  feelings,  even  the  simplest, 
not  speaking  indeed,  of  the  complex,  can  never  be  wholly  con- 
fined to  concepts  or  ideas,  and  therefore  can  never  be  correctly  or 
exactly  expressed  in  words.  Words  can  only  allude  to  it,  point  to 
it.  The  interpretation  of  emotional  feelings  and  emotional  under- 
standing is  the  problem  of  art.  In  combinations  of  words,  in  their 
meaning,  their  rhythm,  their  music;  in  the  combination  of  mean- 
ing, rhythm  and  music;  in  sounds,  colors,  lines,  forms — men  are 
creating  a  new  world,  and  are  attempting  therein  to  express  and 
transmit  that  which  they  feel,  but  which  they  are  unable  to  ex- 
press and  transmit  simply  in  words,  i.  е.,  in  concepts.  The  emo- 
tional tones  of  life,  i.  е.,  of  "feelings,"  are  best  transmitted  by 
music,  but  it  cannot  express  concepts,  i.  е.,  thought.  Poetry  en- 
deavors to  express  both  music  and  thought  together.  The  com- 
bination of  feeling  and  thought  of  high  tension  leads  to  intuition, 
i.  е.,  to  a  higher  form  of  consciousness.  Thus  in  art  we  have 
already  the  first  experiments  in  a  language  of  intuition,  or  a  lan- 
guage of  the  future.  Art  anticipates  a  psychic  evolution,  and 
divines  its  future  forms. 

At  the  present  time  mankind  has  attained  to  three  units  of 
psychic  life:  sensation,  perception,  conception  (and  idea),  and  at- 
tains only  rarely  the  fourth  unit,  higher  intuition,  which  finds  its 
expression  in  art. 

If  Kant's  ideas  are  correct,  if  space  with  its  characteristics  is  a 
property  of  our  consciousness,  and  not  of  the  external  world,  then 
the  three-dimensionality  of  the  world  must  in  this  or  some  other 
manner  depend  upon  the  constitution  of  our  psychic  apparatus. 

It  is  possible  to  put  the  question  concretely  in  the  following 
manner:  What  bearing  upon  the  three-dimensional  extension  of 
the  world  has  the  fact  that  in  our  psychical  apparatus  we  discover 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  75 

the  categories  above  described — sensations,  perceptions,  concepts 
and  intuitions? 

We  possess  such  a  psychical  apparatus,  and  the  world  is  three- 
dimensional.  How  is  it  possible  to  establish  the  fact  that  the 
three-dimensionality  of  the  world  depends  upon  such  a  constitu- 
tion of  our  psychical  apparatus? 

This  could  be  proven  or  disproven  undeniably  only  with  the 
aid  of  experiments. 

If  we  could  change  our  psychic  apparatus  and  should  then  dis- 
cover that  the  world  around  us  changed,  this  would  constitute  for 
us  the  proof  of  the  dependence  of  the  properties  of  space  upon 
the  properties  of  our  consciousness. 

For  example,  if  we  could  make  the  higher  intuition,  existing 
now  only  in  the  germ,  just  as  definite,  exact,  and  subject  to  our 
will  as  is  the  concept,  and  if  the  number  of  characteristics  of 
space  increased,  i.  е.,  if  space  became  four-dimensional  instead 
of  being  three-dimensional,  this  would  affirm  our  presupposition, 
and  would  prove  Kant's  contention  that  space,  with  its  properties, 
is  a  form  of  our  sensuous  receptivity. 

Or  if  we  could  diminish  the  number  of  units  of  our  psychic  life, 
and  deprive  ourselves  or  someone  else  of  conceptions,  leaving  the 
psyche  to  act  by  perceptions  and  sensations  only,  and  if  by  so 
doing  the  number  of  characteristics  of  the  space  surrounding  us 
diminished;  i.  е.,  if  for  the  person  subjected  to  the  test  the  world 
became  two-dimensional  instead  of  three-dimensional,  and  indeed 
one-dimensional  as  a  result  of  a  still  greater  limitation  of  the 
psychic  apparatus,  by  depriving  the  person  of  perceptions — this 
would  affirm  our  presupposition,  and  Kant's  idea  could  be  consid- 
ered proven. 

That  is  to  say,  Kant's  idea  would  be  proven  experimentally  if  we 
could  be  convinced  that  for  the  being  possessing  sensations  only, 
the  world  is  one-dimensional;  for  the  being  possessing  sensations 
and  perceptions  the  world  is  two-dimensional;  and  for  the  being 
possessing,  in  addition  to  concepts  and  ideas,  the  higher  forms  of 
knowledge,  the  world  is  four-dimensional. 

Or,  more  exactly,  Kant's  thesis  in  regard  to  the  subjectivity 
of  space  perception  could  be  regarded  as  proven  (a)  if  for  the 
being  possessing  sensations  only,  our  entire  world,  with  all  its 
variety  of  forms  should  seem  a  single  line;  if  the  universe  of  this 
being  should  possess  but  one  dimension,  i.  е.,  should  this  being  be 


76  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

one-dimensional  in  the  properties  of  its  receptivity;  and  (b)  if  for 
the  being  possessing,  in  addition  to  the  faculty  of  feeling  sensa- 
tions, the  faculty  of  forming  perceptions,  the  world  should  have 
a  two-dimensional  extension.  If  all  our  world  with  its  blue  sky, 
clouds,  green  trees,  mountains  and  precipices,  should  seem  to  him 
one  plane;  if  the  universe  of  this  being  should  have  only  two 
dimensions,  i.  е.,  should  this  being  be  two-dimensional  in  the 
properties  of  its  receptivity. 

More  briefly,  Kant's  thesis  would  be  proven  could  we  be  made  to 
see  that  for  the  conscious  being  the  number  of  characteristics  of  the 
world  changes  in  accordance  with  the  changes  of  its  psychic  appar- 
atus. 

To  perform  such  an  experiment,  effecting  the  diminution  of 
psychic  characteristics  is  impossible — we  cannot  arbitrarily  limit 
our  own,  or  anyone  else's  psychic  apparatus. 

Experiments  with  the  augmentation  of  psychic  characteristics 
have  been  made  and  are  recorded,  but  in  consequence  of  many 
diverse  causes  they  are  insufficiently  convincing.  The  chief 
reason  for  this  is  that  the  augmentation  of  psychic  faculties 
yields,  first  of  all,  so  much  of  newness  in  the  psychic  realm  that 
this  newness  obscures  the  changes  proceeding  simultaneously  in  the 
previous  perception  of  the  world. 

The  entire  body  of  teachings  of  religio-philosophic  movements 
have  as  their  avowed  or  hidden  purpose,  the  expansion  of  con- 
sciousness. This  also  is  the  aim  of  mysticism  of  every  age  and  of 
every  faith,  the  aim  of  occultism,  and  of  the  Oriental  yoga.  But 
the  problem  of  the  expansion  of  consciousness  demands  special 
study;  the  final  chapters  of  this  book  will  be  dedicated  to  it,  and 
it  will  be  the  subject  of  detailed  examination  in  the  book,  "The 
Wisdom  of  the  Gods." 

For  the  present,  in  proof  of  the  above  stated  propositions  with 
regard  to  the  change  of  the  world  in  relation  to  psychic  changes, 
it  is  sufficient  to  consider  the  question  of  the  diminution  of 
psychic  characteristics. 

If  experiments  in  this  direction  are  impossible,  perhaps  observa- 
tion may  furnish  what  we  seek. 

Let  us  put  the  question:  Are  there  not  beings  in  the  world 
standing  toward  us  in  the  necessary  relation,  whose  psyche  is  of  a 
lower  grade  than  ours? 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  77 

Such  psychically  inferior  beings  undoubtedly  exist.  These 
beings  are  animals. 

Of  the  difference  between  the  psychical  nature  of  an  animal 
and  of  a  man  we  know  very  little:  the  usual  "conversational" 
psychology  deals  with  it  not  at  all.  Usually  we  deny  altogether 
that  animals  have  minds,  or  else  we  ascribe  to  them  our  own  psy- 
chology, but  "limited" — though  how  and  in  what  we  do  not 
know.  Again,  we  say  that  animals  do  not  possess  reason,  but 
are  governed  by  instinct,  as  though  they  had  no  self-conscious- 
ness but  were  some  sort  of  an  automatic  ^apparatus.  As  to  what 
exactly  we  mean  by  instinct  we  do  not  ourselves  know.  I  am 
speaking  not  alone  of  popular,  but  of  so-called  "scientific" 
psychology. 

Let  us  try  to  discover  what  instinct  is,  and  learn  something 
about  animal  psychology.  First  of  all  let  us  analyze  the  actions  of 
animals,  and  see  wherein  they  differ  from  ours.  If  these  actions 
are  instinctive,  what  inference  is  to  be  drawn  from  the  fact? 

What  are  those  actions  in  general,  and  how  do  they  differ? 

In  the  actions  of  living  beings  we  discriminate  between  those 
which  are  reflex,  instinctive,  conscious  (and  automatic),  and 
intuitive. 

Reflex  actions  are  simply  responses  by  motion,  reactions  upon 
external  irritations,  taking  place  always  in  the  same  way,  regard- 
less of  their  utility  or  futility,  expediency  or  inexpediency  in  any 
given  case.  Their  origin  and  laws  are  due  to  the  simple  irritability 
of  a  cell. 

What  is  the  irritability  of  a  cell,  and  what  are  these  laws? 

The  irritability  of  a  cell  is  defined  as  its  faculty  to  respond  to 
external  irritation  by  a  motion.  Experiments  with  the  simplest 
mono-cellar  organisms  have  shown  that  this  irritability  acts  ac- 
cording to  definite  laws.  The  cell  responds  by  a  motion  to  outside 
irritation.  The  force  of  the  responsive  motion  increases  as  the 
force  of  the  irritation  is  intensified,  but  in  no  definite  proportion- 
ality. In  order  to  provoke  the  responsive  movement  the  irri- 
tation must  be  of  a  sufficient  intensity.  Each  experienced  irrita- 
tion leaves  a  certain  trace  in  the  cell,  making  it  more  receptive  to 
the  new  irritations.  In  this  we  see  that  the  cell  responds  to  the 
repetitive  irritation  of  an  equal  force  by  a  more  forceful  motion  than 
the  first  one.  And  if  the  irritations  be  repeated  further  the  cell 
will  respond  to  them  by  more  and  more  forceful  motions,  up  to  a 


78  TERTIUM   ORGAXUM 

certain  limit.  Having  reached  this  limit  the  cell  experiences 
fatigue,  and  responds  to  the  same  irritation  by  more  and  more 
feeble  reactions.  It  is  as  though  the  cell  becomes  accustomed  to 
the  irritation.  It  becomes  for  the  cell  part  of  a  constant  environ- 
ment, and  it  ceases  to  react,  because  it  is  reacting  generally  only 
to  changes  in  conditions  which  are  constant.  If  from  the  very 
beginning  the  irritation  is  so  weak  that  it  fails  to  provoke  the 
responsive  motion,  it  nevertheless  leaves  in  the  cell  a  certain 
invisible  trace.  This  can  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  by  re- 
peating these  weak  irritations,  the  cell  finally  begins  to  react  to 
them. 

Thus  in  the  laws  of  irritability  we  observe,  as  it  were,  the  be- 
ginnings of  memory,  fatigue,  and  habit.  The  cell  produces  the 
illusion,  if  not  of  a  conscious  and  reasoning  being,  at  any  rate 
of  a  remembering  being,  habit-forming,  and  susceptible  to  fa- 
tigue. If  we  can  be  thus  deceived  by  a  cell,  how  much  more  liable 
are  we  to  be  deceived  by  the  greater  complexity  of  animal  life. 

But  let  us  return  to  the  analysis  of  actions.  By  the  reflex  ac- 
tions of  an  organism  are  meant  actions  in  which  either  an  entire 
organism  or  its  separate  parts  act  as  a  cell,  i.  е.,  within  the  limits 
of  the  law  of  variability.  We  observe  such  actions  both  in  men 
and  in  animals.  A  man  shudders  all  over  from  unexpected 
cold,  or  from  a  touch.  His  eyelids  wink  at  the  swift  approach 
or  touch  of  some  object.  The  freely-hanging  foot  of  a  person 
in  a  sitting  position  moves  forward  if  the  leg  be  struck  on  the 
tendon  below  the  knee.  These  movements  proceed  independently 
of  consciousness,  they  may  even  proceed  counter  to  conscious- 
ness. Usually  consciousness  registers  them  as  accomplished 
facts.  Moreover  these  movements  are  not  at  all  governed  by 
expediency.  The  foot  moves  forward  in  answer  to  the  blow  on 
the  tendon  even  though  a  knife  or  a  fire  be  in  front  of  it. 

By  instinctive  actions  are  meant  actions  governed  by  expedi- 
ency, but  made  without  conscious  selection  or  without  conscious  aim. 

They  appear  with  the  appearance  of  a  sensuous  tincture  to 
sensations,  i.  е.,  from  that  moment  when  the  sensation  begins  to 
be  associated  with  a  conscious  sense  of  pleasure  or  pain,  and  they 
are  governed,  according  to  the  splendid  expression  of  "Wells,  by 
the  "pleasure-pain  guidance  of  the  animal  life." 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  before  the  dawn  of  self-consciousness,  i.  е., 
of  human  intellect,  throughout  the  entire  animal  kingdom  "ac- 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  79 

tions"  are  governed  by  the  tendency  to  receive  or  to  retain 
pleasure,  or  to  escape  pain.  Schopenhauer  recognized  no 
other  pleasure  than  the  cessation  of  pain,  and  declared  that  pain 
dominated  all  animal  life.  But  this  idea  is  too  paradoxical,  and 
in  substance  it  is  not  true.  Pleasure  and  pain  are  not  different 
degrees  of  one  and  the  same  thing,  and  pleasure  is  not  always  and 
only  the  cessation  of  pain.  In  it  there  is  not  alone  the  cancellation 
of  a  minus,  but  there  is  an  active  plus  element.  The  taste  of 
pleasure  consequent  upon  the  sensation  of  pain,  and  the  taste  of 
pleasure  itself  are  entirely  different. 

We  may  declare  with  entire  assurance  that  instinct  is  a  pleasure- 
pain  which,  like  the  positive  and  negative  poles  of  an  electro- 
magnet, repels  and  attracts  the  animal  in  this  or  that 
direction,  compelling  it  to  perform  whole  series  of  complex  ac- 
tions, sometimes  expedient  to  such  a  degree  that  they  appear  to 
be  sensible,  and  not  only  sensible,  but  founded  upon  foresight  of 
the  future,  almost  upon  some  clairvoyance,  like  the  migration  of 
birds,  the  building  of  nests  for  the  young  which  have  not  yet  ap- 
peared, the  finding  of  the  way  south  in  the  autumn,  and  north 
in  the  spring,  etc. 

But  all  these  actions  are  explained  in  reality  by  a  single  in- 
stinct, i.  е.,  by  the  subservience  to  pleasure-pain. 

During  periods  in  which  milleniums  may  be  regarded  as  days, 
by  selection  among  all  animals  the  types  have  been  perfected, 
living  along  the  lines  of  this  subservience.  This  subservience 
is  expedient,  that  is,  the  results  of  it  lead  to  the  desired  goal. 
Why  this  is  so  is  clear.  Had  the  sense  of  pleasure  arisen  from 
that  which  is  detrimental,  the  given  species  could  not  live,  and 
would  quickly  die  out.  Instinct  is  the  guide  of  its  life,  but  only 
so  long  as  instinct  is  expedient  solely;  just  as  soon  as  it  ceases 
to  be  expedient  it  becomes  the  guide  of  death,  and  the  species 
soon  dies  out.  Normally  "pleasure-pain"  is  pleasant  or  un- 
pleasant not  for  the  usefulness  or  the  harm  which  may  result, 
but  because  of  it.  Those  influences  which  proved  to  be  bene- 
ficial for  a  given  species  during  the  vegetative  life,  with  the 
transition  to  the  more  active  and  complex  animal  life  begin  to 
be  sensed  as  pleasant,  the  detrimental  influences  as  unpleasant. 
As  regards  two  different  species,  one  and  the  same  influence — 
say  a  certain  temperature — may  be  useful  and  pleasant  for  one, 
and  for  another  detrimental  and  unpleasant.    It  is  clear,  there- 


80  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

fore,  that  the  subservience  to  "pleasure-pain"  must  be  governed 
by  expediency.  The  pleasant  is  pleasant  because  it  is  beneficial, 
the  unpleasant  is  unpleasant  because  it  is  harmful. 

Next  after  instinctive  actions  follow  those  actions  which 
are  conscious  and  automatic. 

By  conscious  action  is  meant  such  an  action  as  is  known  to 
the  acting  subject  before  its  execution;  such  an  action  as  the 
acting  subject  can  name,  define,  explain,  can  show  its  cause  and 
purpose  before  its  execution.  Sometimes  conscious  actions  are 
executed  with  such  swiftness  that  they  appear  to  be  unconscious, 
but  in  spite  of  this  it  is  a  conscious  action  if  the  acting  subject 
knows  what  it  is  doing. 

Automatic  actions:  these  are  actions  which  have  been  con- 
scious for  a  given  subject,  but  because  of  frequent  repetitions 
they  have  become  habitual  and  are  performed  unconsciously. 
The  acquired  automatic  actions  of  trained  animals  were  pre- 
viously conscious  not  in  the  animal,  but  in  the  trainer.  Such 
actions  often  appear  as  conscious,  but  this  is  a  complete  illusion. 
The  animal  remembers  the  sequence  of  actions,  and  therefore 
its  actions  appear  to  be  considered  and  expedient.  They  really 
were  considered,  but  not  by  it.  Automatic  actions  are  often 
confounded  with  instinctive  ones — in  reality  they  resemble  in- 
stinctive ones,  but  there  is  an  enormous  difference  between  them. 
Automatic  actions  are  developed  by  the  subject  during  its  own 
life,  and  for  a  long  time  before  they  become  automatic  it  must 
be  conscious  of  them.  Instinctive  actions,  on  the  other  hand, 
are  developed  during  the  life-periods  of  the  species,  and  the 
aptitude  for  them  is  transmitted  in  a  definite  manner  by  hered- 
ity. It  is  possible  to  call  automatic  actions  instinctive  actions 
worked  out  for  itself  by  a  given  subject.  It  is  impossible, 
however,  to  call  instinctive  actions  automatic  actions  worked 
out  by  a  given  species,  because  they  never  were  conscious  in 
different  individuals  of  a  given  species,  but  were  compounded 
out  of  a  series  of  complex  reflexes. 

Reflexes,  instinctive  and  "conscious"  actions,  all  may  be  re- 
garded as  reflected,  i.  е.,  as  not  self-originated.  Both  these  and 
others,  and  still  a  third  class,  come  not  from  man  himself,  but 
from  the  outside  world.  Man  is  the  transmitting  or  trans- 
forming station  for  certain  forces:  all  of  his  actions  in  these  three 
categories  are  created  and  determined  by  his  impressions  of  the 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  81 

outside  world.  Man  in  these  three  species  of  actions  is,  in 
substance,  an  automaton,  unsconscious  or  conscious  of  his 
actions.     Nothing  comes  from  him  himself. 

Only  the  higher  category  of  actions,  i.  е.,  the  intuitive,  appear 
not  to  depend  upon  the  outside  world.  But  the  aptitude  for  such 
actions  is  seldom  met  with— only  in  some  few  persons  whom  it 
is  possible  to  describe  as  men  of  a  higher  type. 

Having  established  the  differences  between  various  kinds  of 
actions,  let  us  return  to  the  question  propounded  before:  In 
what  manner  does  the  psyche  of  an  animal  differ  from  that  of  a 
human  being?  Out  of  the  four  categories  of  actions  the  two 
lower  ones  are  accessible  to  animals  (and  in  very  rare  cases 
the  highest,  the  "intuitive").  The  category  of  "conscious" 
actions  is  inaccessible  to  animals.  This  is  proven  first  of  all  by 
the  fact  that  animals  have  not  the  power  of  speech  as  we  have  it. 

As  has  been  shown  before,  the  possession  of  speech  is  in- 
dissolubly  bound  up  with  the  possession  of  concepts.  Therefore 
we  may  say  that  animals  do  not  possess  concepts. 

Is  this  true,  and  is  it  possible  to  possess  the  instinctive  mind 
without  possessing  concepts? 

All  that  we  know  about  the  instinctive  mind  teaches  us  that 
it  acts  possessing  sensations  and  perceptions  only,  and  that  in 
the  lower  grades  it  possesses  sensation  only.  The  consciousness 
which  does  its  thinking  by  means  of  perceptions  is  the  instinctive 
mind,  i.  е.,  that  which  depends  upon  its  emotions.  The  emotions 
only  give  it  the  possibility  of  exercising  that  choice  between  the 
perceptions  presented  to  it  which  produces  the  impression  of 
judging  and  reasoning.  In  reality  the  animal  does  not  reason 
its  actions,  but  lives  by  its  emotions,  subject  at  every  given 
moment  to  that  emotion  which  happens  to  be  strongest.  Although 
indeed,  in  the  life  of  the  animal,  acute  moments  sometimes  occur 
when  it  is  confronted  with  the  necessity  of  choosing  among  a  cer- 
tain series  of  perceptions.  At  such  moments  its  actions  may 
seem  to  be  quite  reasoned  out.  For  example,  the  animal,  being 
put  in  a  situation  of  danger  acts  often  very  cautiously  and  wisely. 
But  in  reality  its  actions  are  directed  by  emotion  only.  It  has 
been  previously  shown  that  emotions  are  expedient,  and  that  the 
subjection  to  them  in  a  normal  being  must  be  expedient.  Any 
perception  of  an  animal,  any  recollected  image,  is  bound  up 
with   some   emotional   sensation   or   emotional   remembrance — 


82  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

there  are  no  non-emotional,  cold  thoughts  in  the  animal  soul,  or 
even  if  there  are,  these  are  inactive,  and  incapable  of  becoming 
the  springs  of  action. 

Thus  all  actions  of  animals,  sometimes  highly  complex, 
expedient,  and  apparently  reasoned,  we  can  explain  without 
attributing  to  them  concepts,  judgments,  and  the  power  of 
reasoning.  Indeed,  we  must  recognize  that  animals  have  no 
concepts,  and  the  proof  of  this  is  that  they  have  no  speech. 

If  we  take  two  men  of  different  nationalities,  different  races, 
each  ignorant  of  the  language  of  the  other,  and  put  them  together, 
they  will  find  a  way  to  communicate  at  once. 

One  perhaps  draws  a  circle  with  his  finger,  the  other  draws 
another  circle  beside  it.  By  these  means  they  have  already 
established  that  they  can  understand  one  another.  If  a  thick 
wall  were  put  between  them  it  would  not  hamper  them  in  the 
least — one  of  them  knocks  three  times,  and  the  other  knocks 
three    times    in   response. 

The  communication  is  established.  The  idea  of  commu- 
nicating with  the  inhabitants  of  other  planets  is  founded  upon 
the  idea  of  light  signals.  It  is  proposed  to  make  on  the  earth 
an  enormous  lighted  circle  or  a  square  to  attract  the  attention 
of  the  inhabitants  of  Mars  and  to  be  answered  by  them  by  means 
of  the  same  signal.  We  live  side  by  side  with  animals  and  yet 
cannot  establish  such  communication.  Evidently  the  distance 
between  us  and  them  is  greater,  and  the  difference  deeper, 
than  between  men  divided  by  the  ignorance  of  language,  stone 
walls,  and  enormous  distances. 

Another  proof  of  the  absence  of  concepts  in  the  animal  is  its 
inability  to  use  a  lever,  i.  е.,  its  incapacity  to  come  independently 
to  an  understanding  of  the  principle  of  the  action  of  the  lever. 
The  usual  objection  that  an  animal  cannot  operate  a  lever  be- 
cause its  organs  (paws  and  so  forth)  are  not  adapted  to  such 
actions  does  not  hold  for  the  reason  that  almost  any  animal 
can  be  taught  to  operate  a  lever.  This  shows  that  the  difficulty 
is  not  in  the  organs.  The  animal  simply  cannot  of  itself  come  to 
a  comprehension  of  the  idea  of  a  lever. 

The  invention  of  the  lever  immediately  divided  primitive 
man  from  the  animal,  and  it  was  inextricably  bound  up  with 
the  appearance  of  concepts.  The  psychic  side  of  the  understand- 
ing of  the  action  of  a  lever  consists  in  the  construction  of  a 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  83 

correct  syllogism.  Without  constructing  the  syllogism  correctly 
it  is  impossible  to  understand  the  action  of  a  lever.  Having  no 
concepts  it  is  impossible  to  construct  the  syllogism.  The  syllogism 
in  the  psychic  sphere  is  literally  the  same  thing  as  the  lever  in 
the  physical  sphere. 

His  mastery  of  the  lever  differentiates  man  as  strongly  from 
the  animal  as  does  speech.  If  some  learned  Martians  were  look- 
ing at  the  earth,  and  should  study  it  objectively  from  afar  by 
means  of  a  telescope,  not  hearing  speech,  nor  entering  into  the  sub- 
jective world  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth,  nor  coming  in  contact 
with  them,  they  would  divide  the  beings  living  on  the  earth  into 
two  groups:  those  acquainted  with  the  action  of  the  lever,  and 
those  unacquainted  with  such  action. 

The  psychology  of  animals  is  in  general  very  misty  to  us. 
The  infinite  number  of  observations  made  concerning  all  animals, 
from  elephants  to  spiders,  and  the  infinite  number  of  anecdotes 
about  the  mind,  spirit,  and  moral  qualities  of  animals  change 
nothing  of  all  that.  We  represent  animals  to  ourselves  either 
as  living  automatons  or  as  stupid  men. 

We  too  much  confine  ourselves  within  the  circle  of  our  own 
psychology.  We  fail  to  imagine  any  other,  and  think  invol- 
untarily that  the  only  possible  sort  of  soul  is  such  as  we  ourselves 
possess.  But  it  is  this  illusion  which  prevents  us  from  under- 
standing life.  If  we  could  participate  in  the  psychic  life  of  an 
animal,  understand  how  it  perceives  thinks  and  acts,  we  would 
find  much  of  unusual  interest.  For  example,  could  we  represent 
to  ourselves,  and  re-create  mentally,  the  logic  of  an  animal,  it 
would  greatly  help  us  to  understand  our  own  logic  and  the  laws 
of  our  own  thinking.  Before  all  else  we  would  come  to  under- 
stand the  conditionality  and  relativity  of  our  own  logical  con- 
struction and  with  it  the  conditionality  of  our  entire  conception 
of  the  world. 

An  animal  would  have  a  very  peculiar  logic.  It  indeed  would 
not  be  logic  in  the  true  meaning  of  the  word,  because  logic  pre- 
supposes the  existence  of  logos,  i.  е.,  of  a  word  or  concept. 

Our  usual  logic,  by  which  we  live,  without  which  "the  shoe- 
maker will  not  sew  the  boot,"  is  deduced  from  the  simple  scheme 
formulated  by  Aristotle  in  those  writings  which  were  edited  by 
his  pupils  under  the  common  name  of  "Organon,"  i.  е.,  the 
"Instrument"  (of  thought) .    This  scheme  consists  in  the  following : 


84  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

A  is  A. 

A  is  not  A. 

Everything  is  either  A  or  not  A. 

It  is  possible  to  represent  it  more  clearly  in  this  way : 

I  am  I. 

I  am  not  I. 

All  that  is  in  the  world  must  be  either  I  or  not  I. 

The  logic  embraced  in  this  scheme — the  logic  of  Aristotle — 
is  quite  sufficient  for  observation.  But  for  experiment  it  is  in- 
sufficient, because  the  experiment  proceeds  in  time,  and  in  the 
formulae  of  Aristotle  time  is  not  taken  into  consideration.  This 
was  observed  at  the  very  dawn  of  the  establishment  of  our  ex- 
perimental science — observed  by  Roger  Bacon,  and  formulated 
several  centuries  later  by  his  famous  namesake,  Francis  Bacon, 
Lord  Verulam,  in  the  treatise  "Novum  Organum" — "The  New 
Instrument"  (of  thought).  Briefly,  the  formulation  of  Bacon 
may  be  reduced  to  the  following: 

That  which  was  A,  will  be  A. 

That  which  was  not  A,  will  be  not  A. 

Everything  was  and  will  be,  either  A  or  not  A. 

Upon  these  formulae,  acknowledged  or  unacknowledged,  all 
our  scientific  experience  is  built,  and  upon  them,  too,  is  shoe- 
making  founded,  because  if  a  shoemaker  could  not  be  sure 
that  the  leather  bought  yesterday  would  be  leather  tomorrow, 
in  all  probability  he  would  not  venture  to  make  a  pair  of  shoes, 
but  would  find  some  other  more  profitable  employment. 

The  formulae  of  logic,  such  as  those  both  of  Aristotle  and  of 
Bacon,  are  themselves  deduced  from  the  observation  of  facts,  and 
do  not  and  cannot  include  anything  except  the  contents  of  these 
facts.  They  are  not  the  laws  of  reasoning,  but  the  laws  of  the 
outer  world  as  it  is  perceived  by  us,  or  the  laws  of  our  relation  to 
the  outer  world. 

Could  we  represent  to  ourselves  the  "logic"  of  an  animal  we 
would  understand  its  relation  to  the  outer  world.  Our  cardinal 
error  concerning  the  psychology  of  animals  consists  in  the  fact 
that  we  ascribe  to  them  our  own  logic.  We  assume  that  logic  is 
one,  that  our  logic  is  something  absolute,  existing  outside  and  in- 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  85 

dependent  of  us,  while  as  a  matter  of  fact,  logic  but  formulates 
the  laws  of  the  relations  of  our  specific  I  to  the  outside  world,  or 
the  laws  which  our  specific  I  discovers  in  the  outside  world. 
Another  I  will  discover  other  laws. 


The  logic  of  animals  will  differ  from  ours,  first  of  all,  from  the 
fact  that  it  will  not  be  general.  It  will  exist  separately  for  each 
case,  for  each  perception.  Common  properties,  class  properties, 
and  the  generic  and  specific  signs  of  categories  will  not  exist  for 
animals.  Each  object  will  exist  in  and  by  itself,  and  all  its  proper- 
ties will  be  the  specific  properties  of  it  alone. 

This  house  and  that  house  are  entirely  different  objects  for  an 
animal,  because  one  is  its  house  and  the  other  is  a  strange  house. 
Generally  speaking,  we  recognize  objects  by  the  signs  of  their 
similarity;  the  animal  must  recognize  them  by  the  signs  of  their 
difference.  It  remembers  each  object  by  that  sign  which  had  for 
it  the  greatest  emotional  meaning.  In  such  a  manner,  i.  е.,  by 
their  emotional  tones,  preceptions  are  stored  in  the  memory  of  an 
animal.  It  is  clear  that  such  perceptions  are  much  more  difficult 
to  store  up  in  the  memory,  and  therefore  the  memory  of  an  animal 
is  more  burdened  than  ours,  although  in  the  amount  of  knowl- 
edge and  in  the  quantity  of  that  which  is  preserved  in  the  memory, 
it  stands  far  below  us. 

After  seeing  an  object  once,  we  refer  it  to  a  certain  class,  genus 
and  species,  place  it  under  this  or  that  concept,  and  fix  it  in  the 
mind  by  means  of  some  "word,"  i.  е.,  algebraical  symbol;  then  by 
another,  defining  it,  and  so  on. 

The  animal  has  no  concepts;  it  has  not  that  mental  algebra  by 
the  help  of  which  we  think.  It  must  know  always  a  given  object, 
and  must  remember  it  with  all  its  signs  and  peculiarities.  No 
forgotten  sign  will  return.  For  us,  on  the  other  hand,  the  prin- 
cipal signs  are  contained  in  the  concept  with  which  we  have  cor- 
related that  object,  and  we  can  find  it  in  our  memory  by  means 
of  the  sign  for  it. 

From  this  it  is  clear  that  the  memory  of  an  animal  is  more 
burdened  than  ours,  and  this  is  the  principal  hindering  cause 
to  the  mental  evolution  of  an  animal.  Its  mind  is  too  busy.  It 
has  no  time  to  develop.  The  mental  development  of  a  child  may 
be  arrested  by  making  it  memorize  a  series  of  words  or  a  series 


86  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

of  figures.  The  animal  is  in  just  such  a  position.  Herein  lies  the 
explanation  of  the  strange  fact  that  an  animal  is  wiser  when  it  is 
young. 

In  man  the  flower  of  intellectual  force  fades  at  a  mature  age, 
often  even  in  senility;  in  the  animal,  quite  the  reverse  is  true. 
It  is  receptive  only  while  it  is  young.  At  maturity  its  development 
stops,  and  in  old  age  it  undoubtedly  degenerates. 

The  logic  of  animals,  were  we  to  attempt  to  express  it  by  means 
of  formulae  similar  to  those  employed  by  Aristotle  and  Bacon, 
would  be  as  follows: 

The  formula  A,  is  A,  the  animal  will  undersand.  It  will  say 
(as  it  were)  I  am  I,  etc. ;  but  the  formula,  A  is  not, A,  it  will  be  in- 
capable of  understanding.  Not  A — this  is  indeed  the  concept. 
The  animal  will  reason  thus : 

This  is  this. 
That  is  that. 
This  is  not  that. 


or, 


This  man  is  this  man. 
That  man  is  that  man. 
This  man  is  not  that  man. 

I  shall  be  obliged  to  return  to  the  logic  of  animals  later  on; 
for  the  present  it  is  only  necessary  to  establish  the  fact  that  the 
psychology  of  animals  is  peculiar,  and  differs  in  a  fundamental 
way  from  our  own.  And  not  only  is  it  peculiar,  but  it  is  decidedly 
manifold. 

Among  the  animals  known  to  us,  even  among  domestic 
animals,  the  psychological  differences  are  so  great  as  to  differ- 
entiate them  into  entirely  separate  planes.  We  ignore  this,  and 
place  them  all  under  a  single  rubric — "animals." 

A  goose,  having  entangled  its  foot  in  a  piece  of  watermelon  rind, 
drags  it  along  by  the  web  and  thus  cannot  get  it  out,  but  it  never 
thinks  of  raising  its  foot.  This  indicates  that  its  mind  is  so 
vague  that  it  does  not  know  its  own  body,  scarcely  distinguishing 
between  it  and  other  objects.*  This  would  happen  neither  with 
a  dog  nor  with  a  cat.  They  know  their  bodies  very  well.  But 
in  relation  to  outside  objects  the  dog  and  the  cat  differ  widely. 
I  have  observed  a  dog,  a  'Very  intelligent"  setter.       When  the 

*  Mr  V  A  Daniloff  (the  investigator  of  religious  questions,  folk-lore,  sectarianism,  etc.,  who  has 
also  examined  deeply  into  the  comparative  psychology  and  the  psychology  of  animals)  has  called  my 
attention  to  the  fact  that  as  an  example  of  a  "stupid"  animal  it  is  necessary  to  take  the  hen  ana  not 
the  goose.  Geese,  according  to  him,  possess  well  developed  psyches,  communicate  among  themselves, 
and  so  on     In  the  case  in  question  the  goose  might  have  tried  to  tear  the  piece  of  watermelon  rind. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  87 

little  rug  on  which  he  slept  got  folded  and  was  uncomfortable  to 
sleep  on,  he  understood  that  the  nuisance  was  outside  of  him, 
that  it  was  in  the  rug,  and  in  a  certain  definite  position  of  the  rug. 
Therefore  he  caught  the  rug  in  his  teeth,  turned  it  and  pushed  it 
here  and  there,  the  while  growling,  sighing,  and  moaning  until  some- 
one came  to  his  aid,  for  he  was  never  able  to  rectify  the  difficulty. 
With  the  cat  such  a  question  could  not  even  appear.  The  cat 
knows  her  body  very  well,  but  everything  outside  of  herself  she 
takes  as  her  due,  as  given.  To  correct  the  outside  world,  to 
accommodate  it  to  her  own  comfort,  never  comes  into  the  cat  s 
head.  Perhaps  this  is  because  she  lives  more  in  another  world, 
in  the  world  of  dreams  and  phantasies,  than  in  this.  Accordingly, 
if  there  were  something  wrong  with  her  bed  the  cat  would  turn 
herself  about  repeatedly  until  she  could  lie  down  comfortably,  or 
she  would  go  and  lie  in  another  place. 

The  monkey  would  spread  the  rug  very  easily  indeed. 
Here  we  have  four  psychologies,  all  quite  different;  and  this  is 
only  one  example:  it  would  be  possible  to  collect  others  by  the 
hundred.  And  meanwhile  there  is  for  us  just  one  "animal." 
We  mix  together  many  things  that  are  entirely  different;  our 
"divisions"  are  often  incorrect,  and  this  hinders  us  when  it  comes 
to  the  examination  of  ourselves.  To  declare  that  manifest 
differences  determine  the  "evolutionary  grade,"  that  animals  of 
one  type  are  "higher"  or  "lower"  than  those  of  another,  would  be 
entirely  false.  The  dog  and  the  monkey  by  their  intellect,  their 
aptness  to  imitate,  and  by  reason  of  the  dog's  fidelity  to  man,  are 
as  it  were  higher  than  the  cat,  but  the  cat  is  infinitely  superior 
to  them  in  intuition,  esthetic  sense,  independence,  and  force  of 
will.  The  dog  and  the  monkey  manifest  themselves  in  toto:  all 
that  they  have  is  seen.  The  cat,  on  the  other  hand,  is  not  with- 
out reason  regarded  as  a  magical  and  occult  animal.  In  her  there 
is  much  hidden  of  which  she  herself  does  not  know.  If  one  speaks 
in  terms  of  evolution,  it  is  more  correct  to  say  that  the  cat  and  the 
dog  are  animals  of  different  evolutions,  just  as  in  all  probability, 
not  one,  but  several  evolutions  are  simultaneously  going  forward 
in  humanity. 

The  recognition  of  several  independent  and  (mechanically) 
equivalent  evolutions,  developing  entirely  different  properties, 
would  lead  us  out  of  a  labyrinth  of  endless  contradictions  in  our 
understanding  of  man. 


CHAPTER  IX 

The  receptivity  of  the  world  by  a  man  and  by  an  animal.  Illusions  of 
the  animal  and  its  lack  of  control  of  the  receptive  faculties.  The 
world  of  moving  planes.  Angles  and  curves  considered  as  motion. 
The  third  dimension  as  motion.  The  animal's  two-dimensional 
view  of  our  three-dimensional  world.  The  animal  as  a  real  two- 
dimensional  being.  Lower  animals  as  one-dimensional  beings. 
The  time  and  space  of  a  snail.  The  time  sense  as  an  imperfect 
space  sense.  The  time  and  space  of  a  dog.  The  change  in  the  world 
coincident  with  a  change  in  the  psychic  apparatus.  The  proof  of 
Kant's  problem.  The  three-dimensional  world — an  illusionary 
perception. 

E  have  established  the  enormous  difference  exist- 
ing between  the  psychology  of  a  man  and  of  an 
animal.  This  difference  undoubtedly  profoundly 
affects  the  receptivity  of  the  outer  world  by  the 
animal.  But  how  and  in  what?  This  is  exactly 
what  we  do  not  know,  and  what  we  shall  try  to  discover. 

To  this  end  we  shall  return  to  our  receptivity  of  the  world, 
investigate  in  detail  the  nature  of  that  receptivity,  and  then 
imagine  how  the  animal,  with  its  more  limited  psychic  equipment, 
receives  its  impression  of  the  world. 

Let  us  note  first  of  all  that  we  receive  the  most  incorrect  im- 
pressions of  the  world  as  regards  its  outer  form  and  aspect.  We 
know  that  the  world  consists  of  solids,  but  we  see  and  touch  only 
surfaces.  We  never  see  and  touch  a  solid.  The  solid — this  is 
indeed  a  concept,  composed  of  a  series  of  perceptions,  the  result 
of  reasoning  and  experience.  For  immediate  sensation,  surfaces 
alone  exist.  Sensations  of  gravity,  mass,  volume,  which  we  men- 
tally associate  with  the  "solid,"  are  in  reality  associated  with 
the  sensations  of  surfaces.  We  only  know  that  the  sensation 
comes  from  the  solid,  but  the  solid  itself  we  never  sense.  Perhaps 
it  would  be  possible  to  call  the  complex  sensation  of  surfaces, 
weight,  mass,  density,  resistance,  "the  sensation  of  a  solid,"  but 
rather  do  we  combine  mentally  all  these  sensations  into  one,  and 
call  that  composite  sensation  a  solid.     We  sense  directly  only 


90  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

surfaces;  the  weight  and  resistance  of  the  solid,  as  such,  we  never 
separately  sense. 

But  we  know  that  the  world  does  not  consist  of  surfaces:  we 
know  that  we  see  the  world  incorrectly,  and  that  we  never  see  it 
as  it  is,  not  alone  in  the  philosophical  meaning  of  the  expression, 
but  in  the  most  simple  geometrical  meaning.  We  have  never 
seen  a  cube,  a  sphere,  etc.,  but  only  their  surfaces.  Knowing  this, 
we  mentally  correct  that  which  we  see.  Behind  the  surfaces  we 
think  the  solid.  But  we  can  never  even  represent  the  solid  to  our- 
selves. We  cannot  imagine  the  cube  or  the  sphere  seen,  not  in 
perspective,  but  simultaneously  from  all  sides. 

It  is  clear  that  the  world  does  not  exist  in  perspective;  never- 
theless we  cannot  see  it  otherwise.  We  see  everything  only  in 
perspective;  that  is,  in  the  very  act  of  receptivity  the  world  is 
distorted  in  our  eye,  and  we  know  that  it  is  distorted.  We  know 
that  it  is  not  such  as  it  appears,  and  mentally  we  are  continuously 
correcting  that  which  the  eye  sees,  substituting  the  real  content 
for  those  symbols  of  things  which  sight  reveals. 

Our  sight  is  a  complex  faculty.  It  consists  of  visual  sensations 
plus  the  memory  of  sensations  of  touch.  The  child  tries  to  feel 
with  its  finger-tips  everything  that  it  sees — the  nose  of  its  nurse, 
the  moon,  the  reflection  of  sun  rays  from  the  mirror  on  the  wall. 
Only  gradually  does  it  learn  to  discern  the  near  and  the  distant 
by  means  of  sight  alone.  But  we  know  that  even  in  mature  age  we 
are  easily  subject  to  optical  illusions. 

We  see  distant  objects  as  flat,  even  more  incorrectly,  because 
relief  is  after  all  a  symbol  revealing  a  certain  property  of  objects. 
A  man  at  a  long  distance  is  pictured  to  us  in  silhouette.  This 
happens  because  we  never  feel  anything  at  a  long  distance,  and 
the  eye  has  not  been  taught  to  discern  the  difference  in  surfaces 
which  at  short  distances  are  felt  by  the  finger-tips.* 

*  In  this  connection,  there  have  been  some  interesting  observations  made  upon  the  blind  who  are 
Just  beginning  to  see. 

In  the  magazine  Slepetz  (The  Blind,  1912)  there  is  a  description  from  direct  observation  of  how 
those  born  blind  learn  to  see  after  the  operation  which  restored  their  sight. 

This  is  how  a  seventeen-year  old  youth,  who  recovered  his  sight  after  the  removal  of  a  cataract, 
describes  his  impressions.  On  the  third  day  after  the  operation  he  was  asked  what  he  saw.  He  an- 
swered that  he  saw  an  enormous  field  of  light  and  misty  objects  moving  upon  it.  These  objects  he  did 
not  discern.  Only  after  four  days  did  he  begin  to  discern  them,  and  after  an  interval  of  two  weeks, 
when  his  eyes  were  accustomed  to  the  light,  he  started  to  use  his  sight  practically,  for  the  discernment 
of  objects.  He  was  shown  all  the  colors  of  the  spectrum  and  he  learned  to  distinguish  them  very  soon, 
except  yellow  and  green,  which  he  confused  for  a  long  time.  The  cube,  sphere  and  pyramid,  when 
placed  before  him  seemed  to  him  like  the  square,  the  flat  disc,  and  the  triangle.  When  the  flat  disc  was 
put  alongside  the  sphere  he  distinguished  no  difference  between  them.  When  asked  what  impression 
both  kinds  of  figures  produced  on  him  just  at  first,  he  said  that  he  noticed  at  once  the  difference  between 
the  oube  and  the  sphere,  and  understood  that  they  were  not  drawings,  but  was  unable  to  deduce  from 
them  their  relation  to  the  square  and  to  the  oircle,  until  he  felt  in  his  fingertips  the  desire  to  touch  these 
objects.    When  he  was  allowed  to  take  the  cube,  sphere  and  pyramid  in  his  hands  he  at  once  identified 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  91 

We  can  never  see,  even  in  the  minute,  any  part  of  the  outer 
world  as  it  is,  that  is,  as  we  know  it.  We  can  never  see  the  desk 
or  the  wardrobe  all  at  once,  from  all  sides  and  inside.  Our  eye 
distorts  the  outside  world  in  a  certain  way,  in  order  that,  looking 
about,  we  may  be  able  to  define  the  position  of  objects  relatively 
to  ourselves.  But  to  look  at  the  world  from  any  other  standpoint 
than  our  own  is  impossible  for  us,  nor  can  we  ever  see  it  correctly, 
without  distortion  by  our  sight. 

Relief  and  perspective — these  constitute  the  distortions  of  the 
object  by  our  eye.  They  are  optical  illusions,  delusions  of  sight. 
The  cube  in  perspective  is  but  a  conventional  sign  of  the  three- 
dimensional  cube,  and  all  that  we  see  is  the  conditional  image 
of  that  conditionally  real  three-dimensional  world  with  which 
our  geometry  deals,  and  not  that  world  itself.  On  the  basis  of 
what  we  see  we  surmise  that  it  exists  in  reality.  We  know  that 
what  we  see  is  incorrect,  and  we  think  of  the  world  as  other 
than  it  appears.  If  we  had  no  doubt  about  the  correctness  of 
our  sight,  if  we  knew  that  the  world  were  such  as  it  appears, 
then  obviously  we  would  think  of  the  world  in  the  manner  in  which 
we  see  it.  In  reality  we  are  constantly  engaged  in  making  cor- 
rections. 

It  is  clear  that  the  ability  to  make  corrections  in  that  which 
the  eye  sees  demands,  undoubtedly,  the  possession  of  the  con- 
cept, because  the  corrections  are  made  by  a  process  of  reason- 
ing, which  is  impossible  without  concepts.  Deprived  of  the  faculty 
to  make  corrections  in  that  which  the  eye  sees  we  should  have  a 
different  outlook  on  the  world,  i.e.,  much  of  that  which  is  we  should 
see  incorrectly ;  we  should  not  see  much  of  that  which  is,  but  we 
should  see  much  of  that  which  does  not  exist  in  reality  at  all.  First  of 
all,  we  should  see  an  enormous  number  of  non-existent  motions. 
Every  motion  of  ours  in  our  direct  sensation  of  it,  is  bound  up  with 
the  motion  of  everything  around  us.  We  know  that  this  motion  is 
an  illusory  one,  but  we  see  it  as  real.  Objects  turn  in  front  of  us, 
run  past  us,  overtake  one  another.  If  we  are  riding  slowly  past 
houses,  these  turn  slowly,  if  we  are  riding  fast  they  turn  quickly; 
also,  trees  grow  up  before  us  unexpectedly,  run  away  and  disappear. 

these  solids  by  the  sense  of  touch,  and  wondered  very  much  that  he  was  unable  to  recognize  them  by 
sight.  He  lacked  the  perception  of  space,  perspective.  All  objects  seemed  flat  to  him:  though  he  knew 
that  the  nose  protrudes,  and  that  the  eyes  are  located  in  cavities,  the  human  face  seemed  flat  to  him.  He 
was  delighted  with  his  recovered  vision,  but  in  the  beginning  it  fatigued  him  to  exercise  it:  the  im- 
pressions oppressed  and  exhausted  him.  For  this  reason,  though  possessing  perfect  sight,  he  some- 
times turned  to  the  sense  of  touch  as  to  repose. 


92  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

This  seeming  animation  of  objects,  coupled  with  dreams,  has 
always  inspired,  and  still  inspires  the  fairy  tale. 

The  "motions"  of  objects,  to  a  person  in  motion,  are  very 
complex  indeed.  Observe  how  strangely  the  field  of  wheat  be- 
haves just  beyond  the  window  of  the  car  in  which  you  are  riding. 
It  runs  to  the  very  window,  stops,  turns  slowly  around  itself 
and  runs  away.  The  trees  of  the  forest  run  apparently  at  differ- 
ent speeds,  overtaking  one  another.  The  entire  landscape  is  one 
of  illusory  motion.  Behold  also  the  sun,  which  even  up  to  the 
present  time  "rises"  and  "sets"  in  all  languages — this  "motion" 
having  been  in  the  past  so  passionately  defended ! 

This  is  all  seeming,  and  though  we  know  that  these  motions 
are  illusory,  we  see  them  nevertheless,  and  sometimes  we  are 
deluded.  To  how  many  more  illusions  should  we  be  subject  had 
we  not  the  power  of  mentally  analyzing  their  determining  causes, 
but  were  obliged  to  believe  that  everything  exists  as  it  appears? 

I  see  it;  therefore  this  exists. 

This  affirmation  is  the  principal  source  of  all  illusions.  To  be 
true,  it  is  necessary  to  say: 

/  see  it;  therefore  this  does  not  exist — or  at  least  I  see  it;  therefore 
this  is  not  so. 

Although  we  can  say  the  last,  the  animal  cannot,  for  to  its  ap- 
prehension things  are  as  they  appear.  It  must  believe  what  it  sees. 

How  does  the  world  appear  to  the  animal? 

The  world  appears  to  it  as  a  series  of  complicated  moving 
surfaces.  The  animal  lives  in  a  world  of  two  dimensions.  Its  universe 
has  for  it  the  properties  and  appearance  of  a  surface.  And  upon 
this  surface  transpire  an  enormous  number  of  different  motions  of 
a  most  fantastic  character. 

Why  should  the  world  appear  to  the  animal  as  a  surface? 

First  of  all,  because  it  appears  as  a  surface  to  us. 

But  we  know  that  the  world  is  not  a  surface,  and  the  animal 
cannot  know  it.  It  accepts  everything  just  as  it  appears.  It  is 
powerless  to  correct  the  testimony  of  its  eyes — or  it  cannot  do 
so  to  the  same  extent  that  we  do. 

We  are  able  to  measure  in  three  mutually  independent  direc- 
tions :  the  nature  of  our  mind  permits  us  to  do  this.  The  animal 
can  measure  simultaneously  in  two  directions  only — it  can  never 
measure  in  three  directions  at  once.     This  is  due  to  the  fact 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  93 

that  not  possessing  concepts,  it  is  unable  to  retain  in  the  mind  the 
idea  of  the  first  two  directions,  for  measuring  the  third. 

Let  me  explain  this  more  exactly. 

Suppose  we  imagine  that  we  are  measuring  the  cube. 

In  order  to  measure  the  cube  in  three  directions,  it  is  necessary 
while  measuring  in  one  direction,  to  keep  in  mind  two  others — 
to  remember.  But  it  is  possible  to  keep  them  in  mind  as  concepts 
only,  that  is,  associating  them  with  different  concepts — pasting 
upon  them  different  labels.  So,  pasting  upon  the  first  two 
directions  the  labels  of  length  and  breadth,  it  is  possible  to  measure 
the  height.  It  is  impossible  otherwise.  As  perceptions,  the  first 
two  measurements  of  the  cube  are  completely  identical,  and 
assuredly  will  mingle  into  one  in  the  mind.  The  animal,  without 
the  aid  of  concepts,  cannot  paste  upon  the  first  two  measurements 
the  labels  of  length  and  breadth.  Therefore,  at  the  moment  when 
it  begins  to  measure  the  height  of  the  cube,  the  first  two  measure- 
ments will  be  confused  in  one.  The  animal  attempting  to  measure 
the  cube  by  means  of  perceptions  only  without  the  aid  of  concepts, 
will  be  like  a  cat  I  once  observed.  Her  kittens — five  or  six  in 
number* — she  dragged  asunder  into  different  rooms,  and  could 
not  then  collect  them  together.  She  seized  one,  put  it  beside 
another,  ran  for  a  third  and  brought  it  to  the  first  two,  but  then 
she  seized  the  first  and  carried  it  away  to  another  room,  putting 
it  beside  the  fourth ;  after  that  she  ran  back  and  seized  the  second 
and  dragged  it  to  the  room  containing  the  fifth,  and  so  on.  For 
a  whole  hour  the  cat  had  no  rest  with  her  kittens,  she  suffered 
severely,  and  could  accomplish  nothing.  It  is  clear  that  she 
lacked  the  concepts  which  would  enable  her  to  remember  how 
many  kittens  she  had  altogether. 

It  is  in  the  highest  degree  important  to  understand  the  relation 
of  the  animal  consciousness  to  the  measuring  of  bodies. 

The  great  point  is  that  the  animal  sees  surfaces  only.  (We 
may  say  this  with  complete  assurance,  because  we  ourselves 
see  surfaces  only).  Thus  seeing  only  surfaces  the  animal  can 
imagine  but  two  dimensions.  The  third  dimension,  in  contra- 
distinction to  the  other  two,  can  only  be  thought;  that  is, 
this  dimension  must  be  a  concept;  but  animals  do  not  possess 
concepts.  The  third  dimension  like  the  others  appears  as  a  per- 
ception. Therefore,  at  the  moment  of  its  appearance,  the  first 
two  will  inevitably  mingle  into  one.     The  animal  is  capable  of 


94  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

perceiving  the  difference  between  two  dimensions:  the  difference 
between  three  it  cannot  perceive.  This  difference  must  be 
known  beforehand,  and  to  know  it  concepts  are  necessary. 

Identical  perceptions  mix  into  one  for  the  animal,  just  as  we 
ourselves  confuse  two  simultaneous,  similar  phenomena  proceed- 
ing from  the  same  point.  For  the  animal  it  will  be  one  phenom- 
enon, just  as  for  us  all  similar,  simultaneous  phenonena, 
proceeding  from  a  single  point  will  be  one  phenomenon. 

Therefore  the  animal  will  see  the  world  as  a  surface,  and  will 
measure  this  surface  in  two  directions  only. 

But  how  is  it  possible  to  explain  the  fact  that  the  animal, 
inhabiting  a  two-dimensional  world,  or  rather,  perceiving  itself 
as  in  a  two-dimensional  world,  is  perfectly  oriented  in  our  three- 
dimensional  world?  How  explain  the  fact  that  the  bird  flies  up 
and  down,  sideways  and  straight  ahead — in  all  three  directions; 
that  the  horse  jumps  over  ditches  and  barriers;  that  the  dog  and 
cat  appear  to  understand  the  properties  of  depth  and  height 
simultaneously  with  those  of  length  and  breadth? 

In  order  to  explain  these  things  it  is  necessary  to  return  to  the 
fundamental  principles  of  animal  psychology.  It  has  been  pre- 
viously shown  that  many  properties  of  objects  remembered  by 
us  as  general  properties  of  genus,  class,  species,  are  remembered 
by  animals  as  individual  properties  of  objects.  To  orientate  in 
this  enormous  reserve  of  individual  properties  preserved  in  the 
memory,  animals  are  assisted  by  the  emotional  tone  which  is 
linked  up  in  them  with  each  perception  and  each  remembered 
sensation. 

For  example,  an  animal  knows  two  roads  as  two  entirely 
separate  phenomena  having  nothing  in  common;  that  is,  one  road 
consists  of  a  series  of  definite  perceptions  colored  by  definite 
emotional  tones;  the  other  phenomenon — the  other  road — 
consists  of  another  series  of  definite  perceptions  colored  with 
other  tones.  We  say  that  this,  that,  and  the  other  are  roads.  One 
leads  to  one  place,  a  second  to  another.  For  an  animal  the  two 
roads  have  nothing  in  common.  But  it  remembers  in  their  proper 
sequence  all  the  emotional  tones  which  are  linked  with  the  first 
road  and  with  the  second  one,  and  it  therefore  remembers  both 
roads  with  their  turns,  ditches,  fences,  etc. 

Thus  the  remembering  of  definite  properties  of  observed  objects 
helps  the  animal  to  orient  itself  in  the  world  of  phenonena.    But 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  95 

as  a  rule  before  new  phenomena  an  animal  is  much  more  helpless 
than  a  man. 

An  animal  sees  two  dimensions;  the  third  dimension  it  senses 
constantly,  but  does  not  see.  It  senses  the  third  dimension  as 
something  transient,  just  as  we  sense  time. 

The  surfaces  which  an  animal  sees  possess  for  it  many  strange 
properties,  first  of  all,  numerous  and  various  motions. 

As  has  been  said  already,  all  those  illusory  motions  which  seem 
to  us  real,  but  which  we  know  to  be  illusory,  are  entirely  real  to 
the  animal,  the  turning  about  of  the  houses  as  we  ride  past,  the 
growth  of  a  tree  out  of  some  corner,  the  passing  of  the  moon  be- 
tween clouds,  etc.,  etc. 

But  in  addition  to  all  this,  many  motions  must  exist  for  the 
animal  of  which  we  have  no  suspicion.  The  fact  is  that  in- 
numerable objects  quite  immobile  for  us — properly  all  objects — 
must  seem  to  the  animal  to  be  in  motion.  and  the  third- 
dimension  OF  SOLIDS  WILL  APPEAR  TO  IT  IN  THESE  MOTIONS; 
I.  E.,  THE  THIRD-DIMENSION  OF  SOLIDS  WILL  APPEAR  TO  IT  AS  A 
MOTION. 


Let  us  try  to  imagine  how  the  animal  perceives  the  objects  of 
the  outer  world. 

Suppose  it  is  confronted  with  a  large  disc,  and  simultaneously 
with  a  large  sphere  of  the  same  diameter. 

Standing  directly  opposite  them  at  a  certain  distance,  the 
animal  will  see  two  circles.  Beginning  to  walk  around  them, 
it  will  observe  that  the  sphere  remains  a  circle,  while  the  disc 
gradually  narrows,  transforming  itself  into  a  narrow  strip.  On 
moving  farther  around,  the  strip  begins  to  expand  and  gradually 
transforms  itself  into  a  circle.  The  sphere  will  not  change  during 
this  circumambulation.  But  when  the  animal  approaches  toward 
it  certain  strange  phenomena  ensue. 

Let  us  try  to  understand  how  the  animal  will  perceive  the  surface 
of  the  sphere  as  contrasted  with  the  surface  of  the  disc. 

One  thing  is  sure :  it  will  perceive  the  spherical  surface  differently 
from  us.  We  perceive  convexity  or  sphericality  as  a  common 
property  of  many  surfaces.  The  animal,  on  the  contrary,  because 
of  the  very  properties  of  its  psychic  apparatus,  will  perceive  that 
sphericality  as  an  individual  property  of  a  given  sphere.     Now 


96  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

how  will  this  sphericality  as  an  individual  property  of  a  given 
sphere  appear  to  it? 

We  may  declare  with  complete  assurance  that  the  sphericality 
will  appear  to  the  animal  as  a  movement  on  the  surface  which 
it  sees. 

During  the  approach  of  the  animal  toward  the  sphere  something 
like  the  following  must  happen:  the  surface  which  the  animal 
sees  starts  to  move  quickly;  its  center  spreads  out,  and  all  of  the 
other  points  run  away  from  the  center  with  a  velocity  proportional 
to  their  distance  from  the  center  (or  the  square  of  their  distance 
from  the  center). 

It  is  in  this  way  that  the  animal  senses  the  spherical  surface — 
much  as  we  sense  sound. 

At  a  certain  distance  from  the  sphere  the  animal  perceives  it 
as  a  plane.  Approaching  or  touching  some  point  on  the  sphere 
it  sees  that  all  other  points  have  changed  with  relation  to  this 
particular  point,  they  have  all  altered  their  position  on  the 
plane — have  moved  to  one  side,  as  it  were.  Touching  another 
point,  it  sees  that  all  the  rest  have  moved  in  similar  fashion. 

This  property  of  the  sphere  will  appear  as  its  motion,  its 
"vibration."  The  sphere  will  actually  resemble  a  vibrating, 
oscillating  surface,  in  the  same  way  that  each  angle  of  an  immobile 
object  will  appear  to  the  animal  as  a  motion. 

The  animal  can  see  an  angle  of  a  three-dimensional  object  only 
while  moving  past  it,  and  during  the  time  it  takes,  the  object 
will  seem  to  the  animal  to  have  turned — a  new  side  has  appeared, 
and  the  side  first  seen  has  disappeared  or  moved  away.  The 
angle  will  be  perceived  as  rotation,  as  the  motion  of  the  object, 
i.  е.,  as  something  transient,  temporal,  as  a  change  of  state  in 
the  object.  Remembering  the  angles  which  it  has  seen  before — 
seen  as  the  motion  of  bodies — the  animal  will  consider  that  they 
have  ceased,  have  ended,  have  disappeared — that  they  are  in 
the  past. 

Of  course  the  animal  cannot  reason  in  this  way,  but  it  acts  as 
though  it  had  thus  reasoned. 

Could  the  animal  think  about  those  phenomena  which  have 
not  yet  entered  into  its  life  (i.  е.,  angles  and  curved  surfaces)  it 
would  undoubtedly  imagine  them  in  time  only:  it  could  not  pre- 
figure for  them  any  real  existence  at  the  present  moment  when 
they  have  not  yet  appeared.     And   were   it   able   to   express   an 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  97 

opinion  on  this  subject,  it  would  say  that  angles  exist  in  poten- 
tiality, that  they  will  be,  but  that  for  the  present  they  do  not  exist. 

The  angle  of  a  house  past  which  a  horse  runs  every  day  is  a 
phenomenon,  repeating  under  certain  circumstances,  but  nevetheless 
a  phenomenon  proceeding  in  time,  and  not  a  spatial  and  constant 
property  of  the  house. 

For  the  animal  an  angle  will  be  a  temporal  phenomenon  and 
not  a  spatial  one,  as  it  is  for  us. 

Thus  we  see  that  the  animal  will  perceive  the  properties  of  our 
third  dimension  as  motions,  and  will  refer  these  properties  to 
time,  i.  е.,  to  the  past  or  future,  or  to  the  present — the  moment 
of  the  transition  of  the  future  into  the  past. 

This  circumstance  is  in  the  highest  degree  important,  for  there- 
in lies  the  key  to  our  own  receptivity  of  the  world ;  we  shall  there- 
fore examine  into  it  more  in  detail. 


Up  to  the  present  time  we  have  taken  into  consideration  only  the 
higher  animals:  the  dog,  the  cat,  the  horse.  Let  us  now  try  the 
lower:  let  us  take  the  snail.  We  know  nothing  about  its  inner 
life,  but  undoubtedly  its  receptivity  resembles  ours  scarely  at  all. 
In  all  probability  the  snail  possesses  some  obscure  sensations  of 
its  environments.  Probably  it  feels  heat,  cold,  light,  darkness, 
hunger — and  it  instinctively  (i.  е.,  urged  by  pleasure-pain 
guidance)  strives  to  reach  the  uneaten  edge  of  the  leaf  on  which  it 
rests,  and  instinctively  avoids  the  dead  leaf.  Its  movements  are 
guided  by  pleasure-pain :  it  constantly  strives  toward  the  one,  and 
away  from  the  other.  It  always  moves  upon  a  single  line,  from 
the  unpleasant  to  the  pleasant,  and  in  all  probability  except  for  this 
line  it  is  not  conscious  of  anything  and  does  not  sense  anything. 
This  line  is  its  entire  world.  All  sensations,  entering  from  the 
outside,  the  snail  senses  upon  this  line  of  its  motion,  and  these 
come  to  it  out  of  time — from  the  potential  they  become  the 
present.  For  the  snail  our  entire  universe  exists  in  the  future  and 
in  the  past — i.  е.,  in  time.  In  space  only  one  line  exists.  All  the 
rest  is  time.  It  is  more  than  probable  that  the  snail  is  not  con- 
scious of  its  movements.  Making  efforts  with  its  entire  body  it 
moves  forward  to  the  fresh  edge  of  the  leaf,  but  it  seems  as  though 
the  leaf  were  coming  to  it,  appearing  at  that  moment,  coming 
out  of  time  as  the  morning  comes  to  us. 


98  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

The  snail  is  a  one-dimensional  being. 

The  higher  animals — the  dog,  cat,  and  horse — are  two-dimen- 
sional beings.  To  the  higher  animal  all  space  appears  as  a 
surface,  as  a  plane.   Everything  out  of  this  plane  lives  for  it  in  time. 

Thus  we  see  that  the  higher  animal — the  two-dimensional 
being  as  compared  with  the  one-dimensional — extracts  or 
captures  from  time  one  more  dimension. 

The  world  of  a  snail  has  one  dimension;  our  second  and  third 
dimensions  are  for  it  in  time. 

The  world  of  a  dog  is  two-dimensional;  our  third  dimension 
is  for  it  in  time. 

An  animal  can  remember  all  "phenomena"  which  it  has  ob- 
served, i.  е.,  all  properties  of  three-dimensional  solids  with  which 
it  has  come  in  contact,  but  it  cannot  know  that  the  (for  it)  re- 
curring phenomenon  is  a  constant  property  of  the  three-dimen- 
sional  solid — an   angle,   curvature,   or   convexity. 

Such  is  the  psychology  of  the  receptivity  of  the  world  by  a 
two-dimensional  being. 

For  such  a  being  a  new  sun  will  rise  every  day.  Yesterday's 
sun  is  gone,  and  will  not  appear  again;  tomorrow's  does  not  yet 
exist. 

Rostand  did  not  understand  the  psychology  of  "Chantecler." 
The  cock  could  not  think  that  he  woke  up  the  sun  by  his 
crowing.  To  him  the  sun  does  not  go  to  sleep,  it  goes  into  the 
past,  disappears,  suffers  annihilation,  ceases  to  be.  If  it  comes  on 
the  morrow  it  will  be  a  new  sun,  just  as  for  us  with  every  new 
year  comes  a  new  spring.  In  order  to  be  the  sun  shall  not  wake 
up,  but  arise,  be  born.  The  cock  (if  it  could  think  without  losing 
its  characteristic  psychology)  could  not  believe  in  the  appearance 
to-day  of  the  same  sun  which  was  yesterday.  This  is  purely 
human  reasoning. 

For  the  animal  a  new  sun  rises  every  morning,  just  as  for  us 
a  new  morning  comes  with  every  day  and  a  new  spring  with  every 
year. 

The  animal  is  not  in  a  position  to  understand  that  the  sun  is 
the  same  yesterday  and  today,  exactly  in  the  same  way  that 

WE  PROBABLY  CANNOT  UNDERSTAND    THAT    THE    MORNING  IS    THE 
SAME  AND   THE   SPRING   IS   THE   SAME. 

The  motion  of  objects  which  is  not  illusory,  even  for  us,  but 
a  real  motion,  like  that  of  a  revolving  wheel,  a  passing  carriage, 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  99 

and  so  on,  will  differ  for  the  animal  very  much  from  that  motion 
which  it  sees  in  all  objects  which  are  for  us  immobile — i.  е.,  from 
that  motion  in  which  the  third  dimension  of  solids  is  as  it  were 
revealed  to  it.  The  first  mentioned  motion  (real  for  us)  will  seem 
to  the  animal  arbitrary,  alive. 

And  these  two  kinds  of  motion  will  be  incommensurable  for  it. 

The  animal  will  be  in  a  position  to  measure  an  angle  or  a  convex 
surface,  though  not  understanding  their  true  nature,  and  though 
regarding  them  as  motion.  But  true  motion,  i.  е.,  that  which  is 
true  motion  to  us,  it  will  never  be  in  a  position  to  measure,  because 
for  this  it  is  necessary  to  possess  our  concept  of  time,  and  to  measure 
all  motions  with  reference  to  some  one  more  constant  motion,  i.  е., 
to  compare  all  motions  with  some  one.  Without  concepts  the 
animal  is  powerless  to  do  this.  Therefore  the  (for  us)  real  motions 
of  objects  will  be  incommensurable  for  it,  and  being  incommen- 
surable, will  be  incommensurable  with  other  motions  which  are 
real  and  measurable  for  it,  but  which  are  illusory  for  us — motions 
which  in  reality  represent  the  third  dimension  of  solids. 

This  last  conclusion  is  inevitable.  If  the  animal  apprehends 
and  measures  as  motion  that  which  is  not  motion,  clearly  it  can- 
not measure  by  one  and  the  same  standard  that  which  is  motion, 
and  that  which  is  not  motion. 

But  this  does  not  mean  that  it  cannot  know  the  character 
of  motions  going  on  in  the  world  and  cannot  conform  itself  to 
them.  On  the  contrary,  we  see  that  the  animal  orientates  itself 
perfectly  among  the  motions  of  the  objects  of  our  three-dimen- 
sional world.  Here  comes  into  play  the  aid  of  instinct,  i.  е.,  the 
ability,  developed  by  millenniums  of  selection,  to  act  expediently 
without  consciousness  of  purpose.  Moreover,  the  animal  discerns 
perfectly  the  motions  going  on  around  it. 

But  discerning  two  kinds  of  phenomena,  two  kinds  of  motion, 
the  animal  will  explain  one  of  them  by  means  of  some  incomprehen- 
sible inner  property  of  objects,  i.  е.,  in  all  probability  it  will  regard 
this  motion  as  the  result  of  the  animation  of  objects,  and  the 
moving  objects  as  animated  beings. 

The  kitten  plays  with  the  ball  or  with  its  tail  because  ball  and 
tail  are  running  away  from  it. 

The  bear  will  fight  with  the  beam  which  threatens  to  throw 
him  off  the  tree,  because  in  the  swinging  beam  he  divines  some- 
thing alive  and  hostile. 


100  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

The  horse  is  frightened  by  the  bush  because  the  bush  unexpect- 
edly turned  and  waved  a  branch. 

In  the  last  case  the  bush  need  not  even  to  have  moved  at  all,  for 
the  horse  was  running,  and  it  seemed  therefore  as  though  the 
bush  moved,  and  consequently  that  it  was  animated.  In  all 
probability  all  movement  is  thus  animated  for  the  animal.  Why 
does  the  dog  bark  so  desperately  at  the  passing  carriage?  This 
is  not  entirely  clear  to  us  for  we  do  not  realize  that  to  the  eyes  of 
the  dog  the  carriage  is  turning,  twisting,  grimacing  all  over.  It  is 
alive  in  every  part — the  wheels,  the  top,  the  mud-guards,  seats, 
passengers —  all  these  are  moving,  turning. 

Because  of  the  same  law  an  animal  can  never  understand  a 
picture.  The  picture  is  immobile,  while  for  the  animal  the  world 
is  always  moving,  never  coming  to  a  state  of  rest  and  immobility. 


Now  let  us  draw  certain  conclusions  from  all  of  the  foregoing. 

We  have  established  the  fact  that  man  possesses  sensations, 
perceptions  and  concepts;  that  the  higher  animals  possess  sensation 
and  perceptions,  and  the  lower  animals  sensations  only.  The 
conclusion  that  animals  have  no  concepts  we  deduced  from  the 
fact  that  they  have  no  speech.  Next  we  have  established  that 
having  no  concepts,  animals  cannot  comprehend  the  third 
dimension,  but  see  the  world  as  a  surface;  i.  е.,  they  have  no  means 
— no  instrument —  for  the  correction  of  their  incorrect  sensations 
of  the  world.  Furthermore,  we  have  found  that  seeing  the  world 
as  a  surface,  animals  see  upon  this  surface  many  motions  which 
for  us  are  non-existent.  That  is,  all  those  properties  of  solids 
which  we  regard  as  the  properties  of  three-dimensionality,  animals 
represent  to  themselves  as  motions.  Thus  the  angle  and  the 
spherical  surface  appear  to  them  as  the  movements  of  a  plane. 
After  that  we  came  to  the  conclusion  that  everything  which  we 
regard  as  constant  in  the  region  of  the  third  dimension,  animals 
regard  as  transient  things  which  happen  to  objects — temporal 
phenomena. 

Thus  in  all  its  relations  to  the  world  the  animal  is  quite 
analogous  to  the  imagined,  unreal  two-dimensional  being  living 
upon  a  plane.  All  our  world  appears  to  the  animal  as  the  plane 
through  which  phenomena  are  passing,  moving  upon  time,  or  in 
time. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  101 

And  so  we  may  say  that  we  have  established  the  following: 
that  under  certain  limitations  of  the  psychic  apparatus  for  re- 
ceiving the  outer  world,  for  the  subject  possessing  this  apparatus, 
the  entire  aspect  and  all  properties  of  the  world  will  suffer  change. 
And  two  subjects,  living  side  by  side,  but  possessing  different 
psychic  apparatus,  will  inhabit  different  worlds — the  properties 
of  the  extension  of  the  world  will  be  different  for  them.  And  we 
observed  the  conditions,  not  invented  for  the  purpose,  not  con- 
cocted in  imagination,  but  really  existing  in  nature;  that  is,  the 
psychic  conditions  governing  the  lives  of  animals,  under  which  the 
world  appears  as  a  plane  or  as  a  line. 

That  is  to  say,  we  have  established  that  the  three-dimensional 
extension  of  the  world  depends  upon  the  properties  of  our  psychic 
apparatus. 

Or,  that  the  three-dimensionality  of  the  world  is  not  its  property, 
but  a  property  of  our  receptivity  of  the  world. 

In  other  words,  the  three  dimensionality  of  the  world  is  a 
property  of  its  reflection  in  our  consciousness. 

If  all  this  is  so,  then  it  is  obvious  that  we  have  really  proved 
the  dependence  of  space  upon  the  space-sense.  And  if  we  have 
proven  the  existence  of  a  space-sense  lower  in  comparison  with 
ours,  by  this  we  have  proven  the  possibility  of  a  space-sense 
higher  in  comparison  with  ours. 

And  we  shall  grant  that  if  in  us  there  develops  the  fourth  unit 
of  reasoning,  as  different  from  the  concept  as  the  concept  is 
different  from  perception,  so  simultaneously  with  it  will  appear 
for  us  in  the  surrounding  world  a  fourth  characteristic  which  we 
may  designate  geometrically  as  the  fourth  direction  or  the  fourth 
perpendicular,  because  in  this  characteristic  will  be  included  the 
properties  of  objects  perpendicular  to  all  properties  known  to  us, 
and  not  parallel  to  any  of  them.  In  other  words,  we  will  see,  or 
we  will  feel  ourselves  in  a  space  not  of  three,  but  of  four  dimen- 
sions; and  in  the  objects  surrounding  us,  and  in  our  own  bodies, 
will  appear  common  properties  of  the  fourth  dimension  which  we 
did  not  notice  before,  or  which  we  regarded  as  individual  proper- 
ties of  objects  (or  their  motion),  just  as  animals  regard  the  exten- 
sion of  objects  in  the  third  dimension  as  their  motion. 

And  when  we  shall  see  or  feel  ourselves  in  the  world  of  four 
dimensions  we  shall  see  that  the  world  of  three  dimensions  does 
not  really  exist  and  has  never  existed:  that  it  was  the   creation 


102  TERTITJM   ORGANUM 

of  our  own  fantasy,  a  phantom  host,  an  optical    delusion,  a 
delusion — anything  one  pleases  excepting  only  reality. 

And  all  this  is  not  an  "hypothesis,"  not  a  supposition,  but 
exact  metaphysical  fact,  just  such  a  fact  as  the  existence  of  infinity. 
For  positivism  to  insure  its  existence  it  was  necessary  to  annihilate 
infinity  somehow,  or  at  least  to  call  it  an  "hypothesis"  which 
may  or  may  not  be  true.  Infinity  however  is  not  an  hypothesis, 
but  a  fact  and  such  a  fact  is  the  multi-dimensionality  of  space 
and  all  that  it  implies,  namely,  the  unreality  of  everything  three- 
dimensional. 


CHAPTER  X 

The  spatial  understanding  of  time.  The  angles  and  curves  of  the  fourth 
dimension  in  our  life.  Does  motion  exist  in  the  world  or  noti* 
Mechanical  motion  and  "life."  Biological  phenomena  as  the 
manifestation  of  motions  going  on  in  the  higher  dimension.  Evolu- 
of  the  space-sense.  The  growth  of  the  space-sense  and  the  diminu- 
tion of  the  time-sense.  The  transformation  of  the  time-sense  into 
the  space-sense.  The  difficulties  of  our  language  and  of  our  con- 
cepts. The  necessity  for  seeking  a  method  of  spatial  expression  for 
temporal  concepts.  Science  in  relation  to  the  fourth  dimension. 
The  solid  of  four  dimensions.    The  four-dimensional    sphere. 

OW,  from  the  basis  of  those  conclusions  already 
made,   let   us   seek   to   define   how   we   may    dis- 
cover  the   real   four-dimensional    world    obscured 
for   us   by   the   illusory    three-dimensional   world. 
"See"  it  we  may  by  two  methods — either  by  sens- 
ing it  directly,  by  developing  the  "space-sense"  and 
other  higher  faculties,  which  will  be  discussed  later;  or  by  un- 
derstanding it  mentally  by  a  perception  of  its  possible  properties 
through  the  exercise  of  the  reason. 

By  abstract  reasoning,  we  have  already  come  to  the  conclusions 
that  the  fourth  dimension  of  space  must  lie  in  time,  i.  е.,  that 
time  is  the  fourth  dimension  of  space.  We  have  discovered 
psychological  proofs  of  this  thesis.  Comparing  the  receptivity 
of  the  world  by  living  beings  of  different  grades  of  consciousness- 
snail,  dog  and  man — we  have  seen  how  different  for  them  are  the 
properties  of  one  and  the  same  world;  namely,  those  properties 
which  are  expressed  for  us  in  the  concepts  of  time  and  space.  We 
have  seen  that  time  and  space  are  sensed  by  each  in  a  different 
manner:  that  what  for  the  lower  being  (the  snail)  is  time,  for  the 
being  standing  one  degree  higher  (the  dog)  becomes  space,  and 
that  the  time  of  this  being  becomes  space  to  a  being  standing 
still  higher — man. 

This  is  a  comfirmation  of  the  supposition  previously  expressed, 
that  our  idea  of  time  is  complex  in  its  substance,  and  that  in  it  are 
properly  included  two  ideas — that  of  a  certain  space  and  that  of 

103 


104  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

motion  upon  this  space.  Or  to  put  the  matter  more  exactly,  the 
contact  with  a  certain  space  of  which  we  are  not  clearly  conscious 
calls  forth  in  us  the  sensation  of  motion  upon  that  space;  and  all 
this  taken  together,  i.  е.,  the  unclear  consciousness  of  a  certain 
space  and  the  sensation  of  motion  upon  that  space,  we  call  time. 

This  last  confirms  the  conception  that  the  idea  of  time  has  not 
arisen  from  the  observation  of  motion  existing  in  nature,  but 
that  the  very  sensation  and  idea  of  motion  has  arisen  from  a 
"time-sense"  existing  in  ourselves,  which  is  an  imperfect  sense  of 
space:  the  fringe,  or  limit  of  our  space-sense. 

The  snail  feels  the  line  as  space,  i.  е.,  as  something  constant. 
It  feels  the  rest  of  the  world  as  time,  i.  е.,  as  something  eternally 
moving.  The  horse  feels  the  plane  as  space.  It  feels  the  rest  of 
the  world  as  time. 

We  feel  an  infinite  sphere  as  space;  the  rest  of  the  world, 
that  which  was  yesterday  and  that  which  will  be  tomorrow,  we 
feel  as  time. 

In  other  words,  every  being  feels  as  space  that  which  is  grasped 
by  his  space-sense:  the  rest  he  refers  to  time;  i.  е., the  imperfectly  felt 
is  referred  to  time.  Or  it  is  possible  to  formulate  the  matter  thus : 
every  being  feels  as  space  that  which,  by  the  aid  of  his  space-sense 
he  is  able  to  represent  to  himself  in  form,  outside  of  himself;  and 
that  which  he  is  not  able  thus  to  represent  he  feels  as  time,  i.  е., 
eternally  moving,  impermanent,  so  unstable  that  it  is  impossible 
to  imagine  it  in  terms  of  form. 

The  sense  of  space  (space-sense)  is  the  power  of  repre- 
sentation BY  MEANS  of  form. 


The  "infinite  sphere"  by  which  we  represent  the  universe  to  our- 
selves is  constantly  and  continuously  changing:  in  every  con- 
secutive moment  it  is  not  that  which  it  was  before.  A  constant 
change  of  pictures,  images,  relations,  is  going  on  therein.  It  is 
for  us  as  it  were  the  screen  of  a  cinematograph  upon  which  the 
swiftly  running  images  of  pictures  appear  and  disappear. 

But  where  are  the  pictures  themselves?  Where  is  the  light 
throwing  the  image  upon  the  screen?  Whence  do  the  pictures 
come,  and  where  do  they  go? 

If  the  "infinite  sphere"  is  the  screen  of  the  cinematograph  so 
our  consciousness  is  the  light,  penetrating  through  our  psyche:  i.  е., 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  105 

through  the  stores  of  our  impressions  (pictures)  it  (the  light)  throws 
upon  the  screen  their  images  which  we  call  life. 

But  where  do  the  impressions  come  to  us  from? 

From  the  same  screen. 

And  herein  dwells  the  most  incomprehensible  mystery  of  life 
as  we  see  it.  We  are  creating  it  and  we  are  receiving  everything 
from  it. 

Imagine  a  man  sitting  in  the  ordinary  moving  picture  theatre. 
Imagine  that  he  knows  nothing  of  the  construction  of  the  cinemat- 
ograph, nothing  of  the  existence  of  the  lantern  behind  his  back, 
nor  of  the  small  transparent  picture  on  the  moving  film.  Let  us 
imagine  that  he  wants  to  study  the  cinematograph,  and  begins  to 
study  that  which  proceeds  on  the  screen,  to  make  notes,  to  take 
pictures,  to  observe  the  order,  to  calculate,  to  construct  hypotheses, 
and  so  forth. 

At   what   will   he   arrive? 

Evidently  at  nothing  at  all,  unless  he  will  turn  his  back  to  the 
screen,  and  will  begin  to  study  the  cause  of  the  appearance  of  the 
pictures  upon  the  screen.  The  cause  is  confined  in  the  lantern 
(i.  е.,  in  consciousness)  and  in  the  moving  films  of  pictures  (in 
the  psyche) .  These  it  is  necessary  to  study,  desiring  to  understand 
the  "cinematograph." 

Positive  philosophy  studies  only  the  screen  and  the  pictures  pass- 
ing upon  it.  For  this  reason  for  it  remains  the  eternal  enigma — 
wherefrom  are  the  pictures  coming  and  where  are  they  going, 
and  why  are  they  coming  and  going  instead  of  remaining  eternally 
the  same? 

But  it  is  necessary  to  study  the  cinematograph  beginning  with 
the  source  of  light,  i.  е.,  with  consciousness,  then  to  pass  on  to  the 
pictures  on  the  moving  film,  and  only  after  that  to  study  the  pro- 
jected image. 

We  have  established  that  the  animal  (the  horse,  the  cat,  the 
dog)  must  perceive  the  immobile  angles  and  curves  of  the  third 
dimension  as  motion,  i.  е.,  as  temporal  phenomena. 

The  question  arises:  do  not  we  perceive  as  motion,  i.  е.,  as 
temporal  phenomena,  the  immobile  angles  and  curves  of  the 
fourth  dimension?  We  ordinarily  say  that  our  sensations  are  the 
moments  of  the  apprehension  of  certain  changes  proceeding  out- 
side of  us;  such  are  sound,  light,  etc.,  all  "vibrations  of  the  ether.'* 


106  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

But  what  are  these  "changes?"  Perhaps  in  reality  there  are  no 
changes  at  all.  Perhaps  the  immobile  sides  and  angles  of  certain 
things  which  exist  outside  of  us — of  certain  things  which  we 
know  nothing  about — only  appear  to  us  as  motions,  i.  е.,  as 
changes. 

It  may  be  that  our  consciousness,  not  being  able  to  embrace 
these  things  with  the  aid  of  the  organs  of  sense,  and  to  represent 
them  to  itself  in  their  entirety,  just  as  they  are,  and  grasping  only 
the  separate  moments  of  its  contact  with  them,  is  constructing 
the  illusion  of  motion,  and  conceives  that  something  is  moving 
outside  of  it  (of  consciousness),  i.  е.,  that  the  "things"  are  them- 
selves moving. 

If  such  is  the  case,  then  "motion"  must  be  in  reality  some- 
thing only  "derived,"  arising  in  our  intellect  during  its  contact 
with  things  which  it  does  not  grasp  in  their  totality.  Let  us 
imagine  that  we  are  approaching  an  unknown  city,  and  that  it  is 
slowly  "growing  up"  before  us  as  we  approach.  It  appears  to  us 
as  though  it  is  really  growing  up,  i.  е.,  as  though  it  did  not  exist 
before.  There  disappeared  the  river,  which  was  visible  for  so  long 
a  time;  there  appeared  the  bell-tower,  which  was  invisible  before. 
.  .Such,  exactly,  is  our  relation  to  time,  which  is  a  continual 
coming — arising,  as  it  were,  from  nothing  and  going  into  naught. 

Every  thing  lies  for  us  in  time,  and  only  the  section  of  the  thing 
lies  in  space.  Transferring  our  consciousness  from  the  section  of 
the  thing  to  those  parts  of  it  which  lie  in  time,  we  receive  the  illusion 
of  motion  on  the  part  of  the  thing  itself. 

It  is  possible  to  formulate  the  matter  thus:  the  sensation  of 
motion  is  the  consciousness  of  the  transition  from  space  to  time, 
i.  е.,  from  a  clear  space-sense  to  one  which  is  unclear.  With  this 
in  mind  it  is  not  difficult  to  realize  that  we  are  receiving  as  sen- 
sations, and  projecting  into  the  outside  world  as  phenomena, 
the  immobile  angles  and  curves  of  the  fourth  dimension. 

On  this  account  is  it  not  necessary  and  possible  to  recognize 
that  the  world  is  immobile  and  constant,  and  that  it  seems  to  us 
to  be  moving  and  evolving  simply  becaue  we  are  looking  at  it 
through  the  narrow  slit  of  our  sensuous  receptivity? 

We  are  returning  again  to  the  question,  what  is  the  world  and 
what  is  consciousness?  But  now  the  question  concerning  the 
relation  of  our  consciousnss  to  the  world  is  beginning  to  be  for- 
mulated for  us. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  107 

If  the  world  is  a  Great  Something,  possessing  the  consciousness 
of  itself,  so  are  we  rays  of  that  consciousness,  self-conscious,  but 
unconscious  of  the  whole. 


If  there  be  no  motion,  if  it  be  an  illusion,  then  we  must  search 
further — whence  could  this  illusion  have  arisen? 

The  phenomena  of  life — biological  phenomena — much  re- 
semble the  transition  through  our  space  of  certain  four-dimensional 
circles,  the  circles  being  extremely  complicated,  every  one  consist- 
ing of  a  great  number  of  interlaced  lines. 

The  life  of  a  man  or  of  any  other  living  being  suggests  a  compli- 
cated circle.  It  begins  always  at  one  point  (birth)  and  ends  always 
at  one  point  (death) .  We  have  complete  justification  for  supposing 
that  it  is  one  and  the  same  point.  The  circles  are  large  and  small, 
but  they  begin  and  end  similarly,  and  they  end  at  the  same  point 
where  they  began,  i.  е.,  at  the  point  of  non-existence,  from  the 
physico-biological  standpoint,  or  of  some  existence  other  than  the 
psychological  one. 

What  is  the  biological .  phenomenon,  the  phenomenon  of  life? 
Our  science  does  not  answer  this  question.  This  is  the  enigma. 
In  the  living  organism,  in  the  living  cell,  in  the  living  protoplasm 
there  is  something  indefinable,  differentiating  living  matter  from 
dead  matter.  WTe  recognize  this  something  only  by  its  functions. 
The  chief  of  these  functions  is  the  power  of  self-reproduction — 
absent  in  the  dead  organism,  the  dead  cell,  dead  matter. 

The  living  organism  multiplies  infinitely,  incorporating  and 
assimilating  dead  matter  into  itself.  This  ability  to  reproduce 
itself  and  to  absorb  dead  matter  with  its  mechanical  laws  is  the 
inexplicable  function  of  "life,"  showing  that  life  is  not  simply  a 
complex  of  mechanical  forces,  as  the  positivist  philosophy  attempts 
to  prove. 

This  thesis,  that  life  is  not  a  complex  of  mechanical  forces,  is 
corroborated  also  by  the  incommensurability  of  the  phenomena 
of  mechanical  motion  with  the  phenomena  of  life.  Life  phenomena 
cannot  be  expressed  in  terms  of  mechanical  energy,  calories  of 
heat  or  units  of  horse  power,  Nor  can  the  phenomena  of  life  be 
artificially  created  by  the  physico-chemical  method. 

If  we  shall  regard  every  separate  life  as  a  circle  of  the  fourth 
dimension,  this  will  make  clear  to  us  why  every  circle  is  inevitably 


108  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

escaping  from  our  space.  This  happens  because  the  circle  in- 
evitably ends  in  the  same  point  at  which  it  began,  and  the  "life" 
of  the  separate  being,  beginning  with  birth,  must  end  in  death, 
which  is  the  return  to  the  point  of  departure.  But  during  its 
transit  through  our  space,  the  circle  puts  forth  from  itself  certain 
lines,  which,  uniting  with  others,  yield  new  circles. 

In  reality  of  course  all  this  proceeds  quite  otherwise:  nothing 
is  born  and  nothing  dies ;  it  only  so  represents  itself  to  us,  because 
we  see  but  the  sections  of  things.  In  reality,  the  circle  of  life  is 
only  the  section  of  something,  and  that  something  undoubtedly  exists 
before  birth,  i.  е.,  before  the  appearance  of  the  circle  in  our  space, 
and  continues  to  exist  after  death,  i.  е.,  after  the  disappearance 
of  the  circle  from  the  field  of  our  vision. 

To  our  observation  the  phenomena  of  life  are  similar  to  the  phe- 
nomena of  motion  as  these  appear  to  the  two-dimensional  being; 
and  therefore  it  may  be  that  this  is  "the  motion  in  the  fourth 
dimension." 

We  have  seen  that  the  two-dimensional  being  is  bound  to  re- 
gard the  properties  of  the  three-dimensionality  of  solids  as  motions, 
and  the  real  motions  of  solids,  going  on  in  the  higher  space  as 
the  phenomena  of  life. 

In  other  words,  that  motion  which  remains  a  motion  in  the 
higher  space  appears  to  the  lower  being  as  a  phenomenon  of  life, 
and  that  which  disappears  in  the  higher  space,  transforming  its- 
self  into  the  property  of  an  immobile  solid,  appears  to  the  lower 
being    as    mechanical    motion. 

The  phenomena  of  "life"  and  the  phenomena  of  "motion" 
are  just  as  incommensurable  for  us  as  are  the  two  kinds  of  motion 
in  its  world  for  the  two-dimensional  being;  one  of  these  motions 
being  real  and  the  other  illusory. 

Hinton  says  of  this  incommensurability:  "There  is  something 
in  life  not  included  in  our  conceptions  of  mechanical  movement. 
Is  this  something  a  four-dimensional  movement? 

If  we  look  at  it  from  the  broadest  point  of  view  there  is  something 
striking  in  the  fact  that  where  life  comes  in  there  arises  an  entirely 
different  set  of  phenomena  from  those  of  the  inorganic  world."* 

Upon  this  basis  it  is  justifiable  to  assume  that  those  phenomena 
which  we  call  the  phenomena  of  life  are  movements  in  higher  space. 
Those  phenomena  which  we  call  mechanical  motion  become  in 
turn  the  phenomena  of  life  in  a  space  lower  relatively  to  ours,  and 

*  "The  Fourth  Dimension,"  p.  77. 


TERTITJM  ORGANUM  109 

in  one  higher — simply  the  properties  of  immobile  solids.  This 
means  that  if  we  consider  three  kinds  of  existence — the  two- 
dimensional,  ours,  and  the  higher  dimensional— then  it  will 
appear  that  the  "motion"  which  is  observed  by  the  two  dimension- 
al being  in  two-dimensional  space,  is  for  us  a  property  of  immobile 
solids;  "life"  as  it  is  apprehended  in  two-dimensional  space,  is 
"motion"as  we  observe  it  in  our  space.  Moreover,  motions  in 
three-dimensional  space,  i.  е.,  all  our  mechanical  motions  andthe 
manifestations  of  physico-chemical  forces— light,  sound,  heat,  etc., 
— are  only  our  sensations  of  some  to  us  incomprehensible  prop- 
erties of  four-dimensional  solids;  and  our  "phenomena  of  life" 
are  the  motions  of  solids  of  higher  space  which  appear  to  us  as  the 
birth,  growth,  and  life  of  living  beings.  But  if  we  presuppose  a 
space  not  of  four,  but  of  five  dimensions,  then  in  it  the  "phenomena 
of  life"  would  probably  appear  as  the  properties  of  immobile 
solids — genus,  species,  families,  peoples,  races,  and  so  forth — 
and  motions  would  seem  perhaps,  only  the  phenomena  of  thought. 


We  know  that  the  phenomena  of  motion  or  the  manifestations  of 
energy  are  involved  with  the  expenditure  of  time,  and  we  see  how, 
with  the  gradual  transcendence  of  the  lower  space  by  the  higher, 
motion  disappears,  being  converted  into  the  properties  of 
immobile  solids;  i.  е.,  the  expenditure  of  time  disappears — and 
the  necessity  for  time.  To  the  two-dimensional  being  time  is 
necessary  for  the  understanding  of  the  most  simple  phenomena — 
an  angle,  a  hill,  a  ditch.  For  us  time  is  not  necessary  for  the 
understanding  of  such  phenomena,  but  it  is  necessary  for  the 
explanation  of  the  phenomena  of  motion  and  physical  phenomena. 
In  a  space  still  higher,  our  phenomena  of  motion  and  physical 
phenomena  would  probably  be  regarded  independently  of  time, 
as  properties  of  immobile  solids;  and  biological . phenomena — 
birth,  growth,  reproduction,  death — would  be  regarded  as 
phenomena  of  motion. 

Thus  we  see  how  the  idea  of  time  recedes  with  the  expansion  of 
consciousness. 

We  see  its  complete  conditionality. 

We  see  that  by  time  are  designated  the  characteristics  of  a 
space  relatively  higher  than  a  given  space — i.  е.,  the  character- 


HO  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

istics  of  the  perceptions  of  a  consciousness  relatively  higher  than 
a  given  consciousness. 

For  the  one-dimensional  being  all  the  indices  of  two,  three, 
four-dimensional  space  and  beyond,  he  in  time — all  this  is  time. 
For  the  two-dimensional  being  time  embraces  within  itself  the 
indices  of  three-dimensional  space,  four-dimensional  space,  and  all 
spaces  beyond.  For  man,  i.  е.,  the  three-dimensional  being,  time 
contains  the  indices  of  four-dimensional  space  and  all  spaces  beyond. 

Therefore,  according  to  the  degree  of  expansion  and  elevation 
of  the  consciousness  and  the  forms  of  its  receptivity  the  indices 
of  space  are  augmented  and  the  indices  of  time  are  diminished. 

In  other  words,  the  growth  of  the  space  sense  is  proceeding 
at  the  expense  of  the  time-sense.  Or  one  may  say  that  the  time- 
sense  is  an  imperfect  space-sense  (i.  е.,  an  imperfect  power  of  rep- 
resentation which,  being  perfected,  translates  itself  into  the  space- 
sense,  i.  е.,  into  the  power  of  representation  in  forms. 

If,  taking  as  a  foundation  the  principles  elucidated  here,  we 
attempt  to  represent  to  ourselves  the  universe  very  abstractly, 
it  is  clear  that  this  will  be  quite  other  than  the  universe  which  we 
are  accustomed  to  imagine  to  ourselves.  Everything  will  exist  in 
it  always. 

This  will  be  the  universe  of  the  Eternal  Now  of  Hindu  philos- 
ophy— a  universe  in  which  will  be  neither  before  nor  after,  in 
which  will  be  just  one  present,  known  or  unknown. 

Hinton  feels  that  with  the  expansion  of  the  space-sense  our  vision 
of  the  world  will  change  completely,  and  he  tells  about  this  in 
his  book,  "A  New  Era  of  Thought."  (p.  66.) 

The  conception  which  we  shall  form  of  the  universe  will  undoubtedly 
be  as  different  from  our  present  one,  as  the  Copernican  view  differs  from 
the  more  pleasant  view  of  a  wide,  immovable  earth  beneath  a  vast 
vault.  Indeed,  any  conception  of  our  place  in  the  universe  will  be  more 
agreeable  than  the  thought  of  being  on  a  spinning  ball,  kicked  into 
space  without  any  means  of  communication  with  any  other  inhabitants 
of  the  universe. 

But  what  does  the  world  of  many  dimensions  represent  in  it- 
self—what are  these  solids  of  many  dimensions  the  lines  and 
boundaries  of  which  we  perceive  as  motion? 

A  great  power  of  imagination  is  necessary  to  transcend  the 
limits  of  our  perceptions  and  to  mentally  visualize  the  world  in 
other  categories  even  for  a  moment. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  11г 

Let  us  imagine  some  object,  say  a  book  outside  of  time  and 
space  What  will  this  last  mean?  Were  we  to  take  the  book  out 
of  time  and  space  it  would  mean  that  all  books  which  have  existed, 
exist  now,  and  will  exist,  exist  together,  i.  е.,  occupy  one  and  the 
same  place  and  exist  simultaneously,  forming  as  it  were  one  book 
which  includes  within  itself  the  properties,  characteristics  and 
peculiarities  of  all  books  possible  in  the  world.  When  we  say  simply, 
a  book,  we  have  in  mind  something  possessing  the  common  char- 
acteristics of  all  books-this  is  a  concept.  But  that  book  about 
which  we  are  talking  now,  possesses  not  only  these  common 
characteristics  but  the  individual  characteristics  of  all  separate 

books.  ,  T    . 

Let  us  take  other  things— a  table,  a  house,  a  tree,  a  man.    Let 
us  imagine  them  out  of  time  and  space.    The  mind  will  have  to 
open  its  doors  to  objects  each  possessing  such  an  enormous,  such 
an  infinite  number  of  signs  and  characteristics  that  to  comprehend 
them  by  means  of  the  reason  is  absolutely  impossible.    And  it  one 
wants  to  comprehend  them  by  his  reason  he  will  certainly  be 
forced  to  dismember  these  objects  somehow,  to  take  them  at 
first  in  some  one  sense,  from  one  side,  in  one  section  oi  their 
being  What  is  "man"  out  of  space  and  time?  He  is  all  humanity, 
man  as  the  "species  "-Homo  Sapiens,  but  at  the  same  time 
possessing  the  characteristics,  peculiarities  and  individual  ear- 
marks of  all  separate  men.    This  is  you,  and  I,  and  Julius  Caesar 
and  the  conspirators  who  killed  him,  and  the  newsboy    I   pass 
every  day— all  kings,  all  slaves,  all  saints,  all  sinners— all  taken 
together,  fused  into  one  indivisible  being  of  a  man,  like  a  great 
living  tree  in  which  are  bark,  wood,  and  dry  twigs;  green  leaves, 
flowers  and  fruit.    Is  it  possible  to  conceive  of  and  understand 
such  a  being  by  our  reason? 

The  idea  of  such  a  "great  being"  inspired  the  artist  or  artists 
who  created  the  Sphinx.  .  , 

When  I  saw  the  great  Sphinx  adjacent  to  the  pyramids  tor  the 
first  time,  not  in  a  picture,  but  in  reality,  I  felt  that  it  represented 
"humanity,"  or  the  "human  race"  or  "Man'  in  general-that 
being  with  the  body  of  an  animal  and  the  face  of  a  superman. 

But  what  is  motion?  Why  do  we  feel  it  if  it  does  not  exist? 
About  this  last,  Mabel  Collins,  a  theosophical  writer  of  the  farst 

"" ^4a  Search  of  the  Wondrous,"  Vol.  I.,  by  P.  D.  Ouspensky  (in  Russian). 


112  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

period  of  modern  theosophy,  writes  very  beautifully  in  her  poet- 
ical "Story  of  the  Year." 

.  .  .  The  entire  true  meaning  of  the  earthly  life  consists  only  in 
the  mutual  contact  between  personalities  and  in  the  efforts  of  growth. 
Those  things  which  are  called  events  and  circumstances  and  which  are 
regarded  as  the  real  contents  of  life — are  in  reality  only  the  conditions 
which  make  these  contacts  and  this  growth  possible. 

In  these  words  there  sounds  already  quite  a  new  under- 
standing of  the  real.  And  truly  the  illusion  of  motion  cannot  arise 
out  of  nothing.  When  we  are  travelling  by  train,  and  the  trees 
are  running,  overtaking  one  another,  we  know  that  this  motion  is 
an  illusory  one,  that  the  trees  are  immobile,  and  that  the  illusion 
of  their  motion  is  created  by  our  own. 

As  in  these  particular  cases,  so  also  in  general  as  regards  all 
motion  in  the  material  world,  the  foundation  of  which  the 
"positivists"  consider  to  be  motion  in  the  finest  particles  of  matter, 
we,  recognizing  this  motion  as  an  illusory  one,  shall  ask :  Is  not  an 
illusion  of  this  motion  created  by  some  motion  inside  our  con- 


sciousness 


So  it  shall  be. 

And  having  established  this,  we  shall  endeavor  to  define  what 
kind  of  motion  is  going  on  inside  our  consciousness,  i.  е.,  what  is 
moving  relatively  to  what? 

H.  P.  Blavatsky,  in  her  first  book,  "Isis  Unveiled",  touched 
upon  the  same  question  concerning  the  relation  of  life  to  time  and 
motion.    She  writes : 

As  our  planet  revolves  every  year  around  the  sun  and  at  the  same 
time  turns  once  in  every  twenty-four  hours  upon  its  own  axis,  thus 
traversing  minor  cycles  within  a  larger  one,  so  is  the  work  of  the  smaller 
cyclic  periods  accomplished  and  recommenced. 

The  revolution  of  the  physical  world,  according  to  the  ancient  doc- 
trine, is  attended  by  a  like  revolution  in  the  world  of  intellect — the 
spiritual  evolution  of  the  world  proceeding  in  cycles,  like  the  physical 
one. 

Thus  we  see  in  history  a  regular  alternation  of  ebb  and  flow  in  the  tide 
of  human  progress.  The  great  kingdoms  and  empires  of  the  world,  after 
reaching  the  culmination  of  their  greatness,  descend  again  in  accordance 
with  the  same  law  by  which  they  ascended;  till,  having  reached  the  low- 
est point,  humanity  reasserts  itself  and  mounts  up  once  more,  the  height 
of  its  attainment  being,  by  this  law  of  ascending  progression  by  cycles, 
somewhat  higher  than  the  point  from  which  it  had  before  descended. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  113 

The  division  of  the  history  of  mankind  into  Golden,  Silver,  Copper 
and  Iron  Ages,  is  not  a  fiction.  We  see  the  same  thing  in  the  literature 
of  peoples.  An  age  of  great  inspiration  and  unconscious  productiveness 
is  invariably  followed  by  an  age  of  criticism  and  consciousness.  The 
one  affords  material  for  the  analyzing  and  critical  intellect  of  the  other. 

Thus  all  those  great  characters  who  tower  like  giants  in  the  history 
of  mankind,  like  Buddha-Siddartha,  and  Jesus,  in  the  realm  of  spiritual, 
and  Alexander  the  Macedonian  and  Napoleon  the  Great,  in  the  realm 
of  physical  conquests,  were  but  reflexed  images  of  human  types  which 
had  existed  ten  thousand  years  before,  in  the  preceding  decimillennium, 
reproduced  by  the  mysterious  powers  controlling  the  destinies  of  our 
world.  There  is  no  prominent  character  in  all  the  annals  of  sacred  or 
profane  history  whose  prototype  we  cannot  find  in  the  half -fictitious  and 
half -real  traditions  of  bygone  religions  and  mythologies.  As  the  star, 
glimmering  at  an  immeasurable  distance  above  our  heads,  in  the  bound- 
less immensity  of  the  sky,  reflects  itself  in  the  smooth  waters  of  a 
lake,  so  does  the  imagery  of  men  of  the  antediluvian  ages  reflect  itself 
in  the  periods  we  can  embrace  in  an  historical  retrospect. 

As  above,  so  below.  That  which  has  been  will  return  again.  As  in 
heaven,  so  on  earth. 

Anything  that  can  be  said  about  the  understanding  of  tem- 
poral relations  is  inevitably  extremely  vague.  This  is  because 
our  language  is  absolutely  inadequate  to  the  spatial  expression 
of  temporal  relations.  We  lack  the  necessary  words  for  it,  we  have 
no  verbal  forms,  strictly  speaking,  for  the  expression  of  these 
relations  which  are  new  to  us,  and  some  other  quite  new  forms — 
not  verbal — are  indispensable.  The  language  for  the  transmission 
of  the  new  temporal  relations  must  be  a  language  without  verbs. 
New  parts  of  speech  are  necessary,  an  infinite  number  of  new  words. 
At  present,  in  our  human  language,  we  can  speak  about  "time" 
by  hints  only.    Its  true  essence  is  inexpressible  for  us. 

We  should  never  forget  about  this  inexpressibility.  This  is  the 
sign  of  the  truth,  the  sign  of  reality.  That  which  can  be  expressed, 
cannot   be   true. 

All  systems  dealing  with  the  relation  of  the  human  soul  to 
time — all  ideas  of  post-mortem  existence,  the  theory  of  re- 
incarnation, that  of  the  transmigration  of  souls,  that  of  karma — 
all  these  are  symbols,  trying  to  transmit  relations  which  cannot 
be  expressed  directly  because  of  the  poverty  and  the  weakness  of 
our  language.  They  should  not  be  understood  literally  any  more 
than  it  is  possible  to  understand  the  symbols  and  allegories  of 
art  literally.  It  is  necessary  to  search  for  their  hidden  meanings, 
that  which  cannot  be  expressed  in  words. 


114  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

The  literal  understanding  of  these  symbolical  forms  in  the 
latest  theosophical  literature,  and  the  union  with  them  of  ideas 
of  "evolution"  and  "morals"  taken  in  the  most  narrow,  dualistic 
meaning,  completely  disfigures  the  inner  content  of  these  forms, 
and  deprives  them  of  their  value  and  meaning. 


CHAPTER  XI 

Science  and  the  problem  of  the  fourth  dimension.  The  address  of  Prof . 
N  A.  Oumoff  before  the  Mendeleevsky  Convention  m  1911  - -The 
Characteristic  Traits  and  Problems  of  Contemporary  Science 
Thought."  The  new  physics.  The  electro-magnetic  theory.  Ihe 
principle  of  relativity!  The  works  of  Extern  and  ^f  °^y 
Simultaneous  existence  of  the  past  and  the  future.  The  Eternal 
Now.    Van  Manen's  book  about  occult  experiences.     Ihe  drawing 

of  a  four-dimensional  figure. 

PEAKING  generally  with  regard  to  the  problems 
propounded  in  the  foregoing  chapters— those  of 
time,  space,  and  the  higher  dimensions— it  is  im- 
possible not  to  dwell  once  more  upon  the  relation 
of  science  to  these  problems.  To  many  persons 
the  relation  of  "exact  science"  to  these  questions  which  undoubt- 
edly constitute  the  most  important  problem  now  engaging  human 
thought  appears  highly  enigmatical.  ,,1 

If  it  is  important  why  does  not  science  deal  with  it?  And  why, 
on  the  Ztrary,  doe's  science  repeat  the  old,  —cry 
affirmations,  pretending  not  to  know  or  not  to  notice  an  entire 
series  of  theories  and  hypotheses  advanced:' 

Science  should  be  the  investigation  of  the  unknown.  Why, 
therefore,  is  it  not  anxious  to  investigate  this  unknown  which 
has  been  in  process  of  revelation  for  a  long  time-which  soon 
will  cease  to  be  the  unknown?  n      ,    ,•„, 

It  is  possible  to  answer  this  question  only  bJ  .acknowledging 
that  unfortunately  official,  academic  science  is  doing  butae— 
part  of  what  it  should  be  doing  in  regard  to  the  mvestigation  of 
the  new  and  unknown.  For  the  most  part  it  is  on  !y Reaching 
that  which  has  already  become  the  commonplace  of  the  mdepend- 
ent  thinker,  or,  still  worse,  has  already  become  antiquated  and 
rejected  as  valueless.  .         . 

So  it  is  the  more  pleasant  to  remark  that  even  in  science 
may  sometimes  be  discerned  an  aspiration  toward  the  search  of 
new  horizons  of  thought;  or,  to  put  it  differently,  not  always  and 
not  in  all  the  academic  routine,  with  its  obligatory  repetition  of  an 


116  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

endless  number  of  commonplaces,  has  the  love  of  knowledge  and 
the  power  of  independent  thinking  been  crowded  out. 

Although  timidly  and  tentatively,  science,  through  its  boldest 
representatives,  in  the  last  few  years  has  after  all  been  touching 
upon  the  problems  of  higher  dimensions,  and  in  such  cases  has 
arrived  at  results  almost  identical  with  those  propounded  in  the 
preceding  chapters. 

In  December,  1911,  the  second  Mendeleevsky  Convention* 
was  opened  by  the  address  of  Prof.  N.  A.  Oumoff,  dedicated  to 
the  problems  of  time  and  the  higher  dimensions  under  the  title, 
"The  Characteristic  Traits  and  Problems  of  Contemporary 
Natural-Scientific  Thought." 

The  address  of  Prof.  Oumoff,  though  not  altogether  out- 
spoken, was  nevertheless  an  event  of  great  importance  in  the 
history  of  the  development  of  exact  science,  and  some  time  it 
will  doubtless  be  recognized  as  an  unusually  bold  and  brilliant 
attempt  to  come  forward  and  proclaim  absolutely  new  ideas 
which  practically  renounce  all  positivism :  and  in  the  very  citadel 
of  positivism  which  the  Mendeleevsky  Convention  represents. 

But  inertia  and  routine  of  course  did  their  work.  Prof. 
Oumoff's  address  was  heard  along  with  the  other  addresses, 
was  printed  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Convention,  and  there 
rested,  without  producing  at  all  the  impression  of  an  exploded 
bomb  which  it  should  have  produced  had  the  listeners  been  more 
in  a  position  to  appreciate  its  true  meaning  and  significance, 
and — more  important — had  they  had  the  desire  to  do  so. 

In  this  diminution  of  its  significance  the  reserves  and  limitations 
which  Prof.  Oumoff  himself  made  in  his  address  assisted  to  a 
degree,  as  did  the  title,  in  failing  to  express  its  substance  and 
general  tendency,  which  was  to  show  that  science  goes  now  in  a 
new  direction,  and  one  which  is  not  in  reality — i.  е.,  that  the  new 
direction   goes   against   science. 

Professor  Oumoff  died  several  months  ago,  and  I  am  unwilling 
to  impose  upon  him  thoughts  which  he  did  not  share.  I  talked 
with  him  in  January,  1912,  and  from  our  conversation  I  saw 
that  he  was  stopping  half  way,  as  it  were,  between  the  ideas  of  the 
fourth  dimension  approximating  those  expressed  by  me  in  the 
first  edition  of  Tertium  Organum  and  those  physical  theories 
which  still  admit  motion  as  an  independent  fact.  What  I  wish 
to  convey  is  that  Prof.  Oumoff,  admitting   time    as  being  the 

*  A  convention  of  Russian  scientists,  named  in  honor  of  the  famous  Russian  chemist,  Prof.  Men- 
deleeff.     Transl. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  117 

fourth  dimension  of  space,  did  not  regard  motion  as  the  illusion 
of  our  consciousness,  but  recognized  the  reality  of  motion  in  the 
world,  as  a  fact  independent  of  us  and  our  psyche. 

I  speak  of  this,  because  later  I  shall  quote  extracts  from  Prof. 
Oumoff's  paper,  choosing  generally  those  places  containing  the 
ideas  almost  identical  with  the  thoughts  expressed  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapters. 

That  part  of  the  address  which  pictures  the  evolution  of  modern 
physics  from  the  atom  to  the  electron  I  shall  omit,  because  this 
seems  to  me  somewhat  artificially  united  to  those  ideas  upon  which 
I  wish  to  dwell,  and  is  not  inwardly  connected  with  them  at  all. 

From  my  standpoint  it  is  immaterial  whether  we  make  the 
foundation  of  matter  the  atom  or  the  electron.  I  believe  that  at 
the  foundation  of  matter  lies  illusion.  And  the  consistent  develop- 
ment of  those  ideas  of  higher  space  which  Prof.  Oumoff  made  the 
basis  of  his  address  leads,  in  my  opinion,  to  the  negation  of 
motion;  just  as  the  consistent  development  of  the  ideas  of  mathe- 
matical physics  has  led  to  the  negation  of  matter  as  substance. 

Having  mentioned  electrons,  I  may  add  that  there  is  a  method 
whereby  modern  scientific  ideas  and  the  data  of  the  psychological 
method  may  be  reconciled;  namely,  by  the  aid  of  the  very  ancient 
systems  of  the  Kabala,  Alchemy  and  so  forth,  which  establish 
the  foundation  of  the  material  world  in  four  principles  or  elements, 
of  which  the  first  two — fire  and  water — correspond  to  the  positive 
and  negative  electrons  of  modern  physics. 

But  in  such  case  the  electrons  must  be  regarded,  not  as  electro- 
magnetic units,  but  as  principles  only,  i.  е.,  as  two  opposite  aspects, 
phases  of  the  world,  or  in  other  words,  as  metaphysical  units. 
The  transition  of  physics  into  metaphysics  is  inevitable  if  the 
physicists  desire  to  be  simply  logical. 

Prof.  Oumoff's  address  is  interesting  and  remarkable  in  that 
it  steps  already  on  the  very  threshold  of  metaphysics,  and  he  is 
perhaps  hindered  only  by  a  lingering  faith  in  the  value  of  the 
positivistic  method,  which  dies  when  the  new  watch-words  of 
science   are   declared. 

The  introductory  word  to  our  forthcoming  labors  [says  Prof.  Oumoff] 
it  will  be  most  proper  to  dedicate  to  the  excursions  of  scientific  thought 
in  its  search  for  the  image  of  the  world.  The  necessity  for  scientific  re- 
search along  this  path  will  become  clear  if  we  will  turn  to  the  covenants 
of  our  high  priests  of  science.    These  covenants  convey  the  deep  motives 


118  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

of  active  service  to  natural  science  and  to  men.  It  is  useful  to  express 
them  in  our  time,  wherein  thought  is  pre-eminently  directed  to  the  ques- 
tions of  the  organization  of  life.  Let  us  remember  the  credo  of  the 
natural  scientist: 

To  establish  the  authority  of  man  over  energy,  time  and  space: 

To  know  the  architecture  of  the  universe,  and  in  this  knowledge  to 
find  a  basis  of  creative  foresight:  This  foresight  inspires  confi- 
dence that  natural  science  continuing  the  great  and  responsible  work  of 
creation  in  the  fields  of  nature  which  it  has  already  made  its  own,  will 
not  fail  to  enter  a  new  field  adapted  to  the  enlarged  necessities  of  man- 
kind. 

This  new  nature  has  become  a  vital  necessity  of  personal  and  public 
activity.  But  its  grandeur  and  power  summon  the  mind  as  it  were  to 
tranquillity. 

The  demand  for  stability  in  the  household  and  the  brevity  of  the  per- 
sonal experience  in  comparison  with  the  evolution  of  the  earth  lead  men 
to  faith,  and  create  in  them  an  image  of  the  durability  of  the  surrounding 
order  of  things  not  for  the  present  only,  but  for  the  future.  The  pioneers 
of  natural  science  do  not  enjoy  such  a  serene  point  of  view,  and  to  this 
circumstance  the  natural  sciences  are  indebted  for  their  continuous  de- 
velopment. I  venture  to  lift  the  brilliant  and  familiar  veil  and  throw 
open  the  sanctuaries  of  scientific  thought,  now  poised  upon  the  summit 
of  two  contrasted  contemplations  of  the  world. 

The  steersman  of  science  shall  be  ceaselessly  vigilant,  despite  the  felic- 
ity of  his  voyage;  above  him  shall  invariably  shine  the  stars  by  which  he 
finds  his  way  upon  the  ocean  of  the  unknown. 

At  the  time  in  which  we  are  living  now  the  constellations  in  the  skies 
of  our  science  have  changed,  and  a  new  star  has  flashed  out,  having  no 
equal  to  itself  in  brightness. 

Persistent  scientific  investigation  has  expanded  the  volume  of  the 
knowable  to  dimensions  which  could  scarcely  be  imagined  only  a  short 
time — fifteen  or  twenty  years — ago.  Number  remains,  as  before,  the 
lawmaker  of  nature,  but,  being  capable  of  representation,  it  has  escaped 
from  that  mode  of  contemplating  the  world  which  regarded  as  possible 
its  representation  by  mechanical  models. 

This  augmentation  of  knowledge  gives  a  sufficient  number  of  images 
for  the  construction  of  the  world,  but  they  destroy  its  architecture  as  that 
is  known  to  us,  and  create  as  it  were  a  new  order,  extending  far,  in  its 
free  lines,  beyond  the  limits  not  only  of  the  old  visible  world,  but  even 
beyond  the  fundamental  forms  of  our  thinking. 

I  have  now  to  lead  you  to  the  summits  from  which  open  the  perspec- 
tives that  are  re-forming  the  very  basis  of  our  understanding  of  the 
world. 

The  ascent  to  them  amid  the  ruins  of  classical  physics  is  attended 
with  no  small  difficulty,  and  I  ask  in  advance  your  indulgence  and  shall 
exercise  all  my  efforts  to  simplify  and  shorten  our  path  as  far  as  pos- 
sible. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  119 

Prof.  Oumoff  proceeds  to  picture  the  evolution  of  form  "from  the  atom 
to  the  electron,"  from  materialistic  and  mechanistic  ideas  about  the 
universe  to  the  electro-magnetic  theory. 

The  axioms  of  mechanics  are  only  fragments,  and  their  application 
may  be  compared  to  the  judgment  concerning  the  contents  of  an  entire 
chapter  by  means  of  a  single  sentence. 

Therefore  it  is  not  strange  that  the  attempt  of  the  mechanistic  ex- 
planation of  the  properties  of  the  electro-magnetic  ether  by  the  aid  of 
axioms  in  which  these  properties  were  either  denied  or  one-sidedly  pre- 
determined was  doomed  to  failure. 

The  mechanistic  contemplation  of  the  world  appeared  as  one- 
sided ...  In  the  image  of  the  world,  unity  was  not  in  evidence.  The 
electro-magnetic  world  could  not  remain  as  something  quite  alien,  un- 
related to  matter.  The  material  mode  of  contemplating  the  world,  with 
its  fixed  formulae,  had  no  sufficient  flexibility  to  bring  about  unification 
through  it  and  its  principles.  There  remained  only  one  way  out — to 
sacrifice  one  of  the  worlds — the  material,  the  mechanistic,  or  the  electro- 
magnetic. It  was  necessary  to  find  sufficient  foundations  for  decision  on 
the  one  side  or  on  the  other.    These  were  not  slow  to  appear. 

The  consequent  development  of  physics  is  a  process  against  matter, 
which  ended  with  its  expulsion.  But  along  with  this  negative  activity 
has  gone  the  creative  work  of  the  reformation  of  electro-magnetic  sym- 
bolics; it  was  forced  to  become  adequate  to  express  the  properties  of  the 
material  world,  its  atomic  structure,  inertia,  radiation  and  absorption 
of  energy,  electro-magnetic  phenomena.     .     . 

.  .  .  On  the  horizon  of  scientific  thought  was  arising  the  electronic 
theory  of  matter. 

Through  electrical  corpuscles  was  opening  the  connection  between 
matter  and  vacuum.     .     . 

.  .  .  The  idea  of  a  special  substratum  filling  the  vacuum — ether — 
became  superfluous. 

.  .  .  Light  and  heat  are  born  by  the  motion  of  electrons.  They 
are  the  suns  of  microcosms. 

.  .  .  The  universe  consists  of  positive  and  negative  corpuscles, 
bound  by  electro-magnetic  fields. 

Matter  disappeared;  its  variety  was  replaced  by  a  system  of  mutually 
related  electric  corpuscles  and  instead  of  the  accustomed  material  world 
one  deeply  different — the  electro-magnetic  world — is  envisaging  itself  to 
us.     .     . 

But  the  recognition  of  the  electro-magnetic  world  did  not  annihilate 
many  unsolved  problems  and  difficulties,  and  the  necessity  for  a 
generalizing  system  was  felt. 

In  our  difficult  ascent  we  have  reached  the  point,  according  to  Prof. 
Oumoff,  at  which  the  road  divides.  One  stretches  horizontally  to  that 
plane  which  has  been  pictured,  another  goes  to  the  high  summit  which 
is  already  visible,  and  the  grade  is  not  steep. 

Let  us  look  about  us  at  the  point  which  we  have  reached.  It  is  very 
dangerous;  not  one  theory  only  has  suffered  wreck  there.    It  is  the  more 


120  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

dangerous  that  its  subtlety  is  covered  by  the  mask  of  simplicity.  Its 
basis  is  the  experimental  attempts  which  gave  a  negative  answer  to  the 
researches  of  careful  and  skilled  experimenters. 

Prof.  Oumoff  shows  the  contradictions  which  were  the  outcome  of 
certain  experiments.  The  necessity  to  explain  these  contradictions 
served  as  the  incentive  to  the  discovery  of  the  unifying  principle:  this 
was  the  principle  of  relativity. 

The  deductions  of  Lorentz,  which  were  made  in  1909,  and  which  in 
general  had  in  view  electro-optical  phenomena  only,  gave  the  impetus 
to  the  promulgation  by  Albert  Einstein  of  a  new  principle  and  to  its  re- 
markable generalization  by  the  recently  deceased  Hermann  Minkowsky. 

We  are  approaching  the  summit  of  modern  physics.  It  is  occupied  by 
the  principle  of  relativity,  the  expression  of  which  is  so  simple  that  it 
is  difficult  to  discern  its  all-important  significance.  It  asserts  that  the 
laws  of  phenomena  in  the  system  of  bodies  for  the  observer  who  is  con- 
nected with  it,  will  be  the  same,  whether  this  system  is  at  rest,  or  is 
moving  uniformly  and  rectilinearly. 

Hence  it  follows  that  the  observer  cannot  detect  by  the  aid  of  the 
phenomena  which  are  proceeding  in  the  system  of  bodies  with  which  he 
is  connected,  whether  this  system  has  a  uniform  translational  motion 
or  not. 

Thus  we  cannot  detect  from  any  phenomena  proceeding  on  the  earth, 
its  translational  motion  in  space. 

The  principle  of  relativity  includes  the  observing  intellect  within 
itself  which  is  a  circumstance  of  extraordinary  significance.  The  intellect 
is  connected  with  a  complex  physical  instrument — the  nervous  system. 
This  principle  therefore  gives  directions  concerning  things  proceeding 
in  moving  bodies,  not  only  in  relation  to  physical  and  chemical  phe- 
nomena, but  also  in  relation  to  the  phenomena  of  life  and  therefore  to 
the  quests  of  man.  It  is  remarkable  as  an  example  of  a  thesis,  founded 
upon  strictly  scientific  experiment,  in  a  purely  physical  region,  which 
erects  a  bridge  between  two  worlds  usually  regarded  as  quite  distinct. 

Prof.  Oumoff  gives  examples  of  the  explanation  of  complex  phe- 
nomena by  the  aid  of  the  principle  of  relativity. 

He  shows  further  how  the  most  enigmatical  problems  of  life  are  ex- 
plained from  the  standpoint  of  the  electro-magnetic  theory  and  the 
principle  of  relativity,  and  he  comes  at  last  to  that  which  is  the  most 
interesting  to  us. 

Time  is  involved  in  all  spatial  measurements  *  We  cannot  define  the 
geometrical  form  of  a  solid  moving  in  relation  to  us;  we  are  always  defining 
its  kinematical  form.  Therefore  our  spatial  measurements  are  in  reality 
proceeding  not  in  a  three-dimensional  manifold  ,  i.  е.,  having  three  dimen- 
sions, of  height,  length  and  width,  like  this  hall,  but  in  a  four-dimensional 
manifold:  the  first  three  dimensions  we  can  represent  by  the  divisions  of  a 
tape-measure  upon  which  are  marked  feel,  yards,  or  some  other  measure 
of  length;  the  fourth  dimension  we  will  represent  by  the  film  of  a  cinemato- 
graph upon  which  each  point  corresponds  to  a  new  phase  of  the  world's 
phenomena.    The  distances  between  the  points  of  this  film  are  measured  by 

*  Italicized  by  me.     P.  Ouspensky. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  121 

a  clock  going  indifferently  with  this  or  that  velocity.  One  observer  will 
measure  the  distance  between  two  points  by  a  year — another  by  a  hundred 
years.  The  transition  from  one  point  to  another  of  this  film  corresponds 
to  our  concept  of  the  flow  of  time.  This  fourth  dimension  we  will  call, 
therefore,  time.  The  film  of  a  cinematograph  can  replace  the  reel  of  any 
tape-measure,  and  contrariwise.  The  ingenious  mathematician,  Min- 
kowsky, who  died  too  young,  proved  that  all  these  four  dimensions  are 
equivalent.  How  shall  we  comprehend  this?  Persons  who  arrive  in  St. 
Petersburg  from  Moscow  have  passed  through  Tver.  They  are  not  at  this 
station  (Tver)  any  longer,  but  nevertheless  it  continues  to  exist.  In  the  same 
manner,  that  moment  of  time  corresponding  to  some  event  which  has  already 
passed — the  beginning  of  life  on  earth,  for  example — has  not  disappeared, 
it  exists  still.  It  is  not  outlived  by  the  universe,  but  only  by  the  earth. 
The  place  of  this  event  is  defined  by  a  certain  point  in  the  four -dimensional 
universe  and  this  point  existed,  is  existing,  and  will  exist;  now  through  it, 
through  this  station  passed  by  the  earth,  passes  another  wanderer.  Time 
does  not  flow,  any  more  than  space  flows.  It  is  we  who  arefl  owing,  wan- 
derers in  a  four-dimensional  universe.  Time  is  just  the  same  measurement 
of  space  as  is  length,  breadth  and  height.  Having  changed  them  in  the 
expression  of  some  law  of  nature  we  are  returning  to  the  identical  law. 

These  new  concepts  are  embodied  by  Minkowsky  in  an  elegant  mathemat- 
ical theory;  we  shall  not  enter  the  magnificent  temple  erected  by  his  genius, 
from  which  proceeds  this  voice: 

In  nature  all  is  given:  for  her  the  past  and  future  do  not  exist;  she  is  the 
eternal  present;  she  has  no  limits,  either  of  space  or  of  time.  Changes  are 
proceeding  in  individuals  and  correspond  to  their  displacements  upon 
world-ways  in  a  four-dimensional  eternal  and  limitless  manifold. 
These  concepts  in  the  region  of  philosophical  thought  will  produce  a  revolu- 
tion considerably  greater  than  that  caused  by  the  displacement  of  the  earth 
from  the  center  of  the  universe  by  Copernicus.  From  the  times  of  Newton 
to  those  of  natural  science,  more  brilliant  perspectives  have  never  opened 
up.  Is  not  the  power  of  natural  science  proclaimed  in  the  transition 
from  the  undoubted  experimental  fact — the  impossibility  of  the  absolute 
motion  of  the  earth — to  a  problem  of  the  soul!  A  contemporary 
philosopher  exclaimed  in  his  confusion,  "beyond  truth  and  falsehood." 

When  the  cult  of  a  new  God  is  born  his  word  is  not  perfectly  under- 
stood; the  true  meaning  only  becomes  clear  after  the  lapse  of  time.  I 
think  that  this  is  true  also  as  regards  the  principle  of  relativity.  The 
elimination  of  anthropomorphism  from  scientific  conceptions  was  of 
enormous  service  to  science.  On  the  same  path  stands  the  principle  of 
relativity  showing  the  dependence  of  our  observations  on  general  condi- 
tions of  phenomena. 

The  electro-magnetic  theory  of  the  world  (and  the  principle  of  rela- 
tivity) explains  only  those  phenomena  the  place  of  which  is  defined  by 
that  part  of  the  universe  which  is  occupied  by  matter;  the  rest  of  it, 
which  presents  itself  to  our  senses  as  a  vacuum  remains  as  yet  beyond 
the  reach  of  science.    But  at  the  shores  of  the  material  world  is  change- 


122  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

lessly  dashing  the  surf  of  new  energy  from  that  deep  ocean  empty  for 
our  senses,  but  not  for  our  reason. 

Is  not  this  dualism  of  matter  and  vacuum  the  anthropomorphism  of 
science,  and  the  last  one?  Let  us  put  the  fundamental  question: 
What  part  of  the  universe  is  filled  by  matter?  Let  us  surround  our 
planetary  system  with  a  sphere  the  radius  of  which  is  equal  to  half  of 
the  distance  from  the  sun  to  the  nearest  stars:  the  length  of  this  radius 
is  traversed  by  a  light-ray  in  one  and  a  half  years.  The  volume  of  this 
sphere  let  us  take  as  the  volume  of  our  world.  Let  us  now  describe, 
with  the  sun  as  a  center,  another,  lesser  sphere  with  a  radius  equal  to 
the  distance  of  our  sun  to  the  outermost  planet.  I  admit  that  the  matter 
of  our  world,  collected  in  one  place,  will  not  take  more  than  one-tenth 
of  the  volume  of  the  planetary  sphere:  I  think  that  this  figure  is  con- 
siderably exaggerated.  After  calculations  of  volume  it  will  appear  that 
in  our  world  the  volume  occupied  by  the  matter  will  be  related  to  the 
volume  of  the  vacuum  as  the  figure  1  to  the  number  represented  by  the 
figure  3  with  13  zeros.  This  relation  is  equivalent  to  the  relation  of  one 
second  to  one  million  years. 

According  to  the  calculations  of  Lord  Kelvin,  the  density  of  matter 
corresponding  to  such  a  relation  would  be  less  than  the  density  of  water 
by  ten  thousand  million  times,  i.  е.,  it  would  be  in  an  extreme  degree  of 
rarification. 

Prof.  Oumoff  gives  the  example  of  such  a  number  of  balls  as  corre- 
spond to  the  number  of  seconds  in  one  million  years.  Upon  one  of 
these  balls  (corresponding  to  the  matter  in  the  universe)  is  written  all 
that  we  know,  because  all  that  we  know  is  related  to  matter.  And 
matter  is  only  one  ball  among  millions  and  millions  of  "  balls  of  vacuum." 

Hence  the  conclusion,  says  he: 

Matter  represents  a  highly  improbable  event  in  the  universe.  This 
event  came  into  existence  because  small  probability  does  not  mean  im- 
possibility. But  where,  and  in  what  manner,  are  realized  more  probable 
events?    Is  it  not  in  the  domain  of  radiant  energy? 

The  theory  of  probability  includes  the  immense  part  of  the  universe — 
the  vacuum — in  the  world  of  becoming.  We  know  that  radiant  energy 
possesses  the  preponderating  mass.  Among  the  different  phenomena 
in  the  world  of  inter-crossing  rays,  out  of  elements  attracting  each  other, 
are  not  the  tiny  fragments  born  which  by  their  congregation  compose 
our  material  world?  Is  not  the  vacuum  the  laboratory  of  matter?  The 
material  world  corresponds  to  that  limited  horizon  which  is  open  to  a 
man  who  has  come  out  into  a  field.  To  his  senses  life  is  teeming  only 
within  the  limits  of  this  horizon;  outside  of  it  for  the  senses  of  man  there 
is  only  a  vacuum. 

I  do  not  desire  to  start  a  polemic  about  those  thoughts  in  Prof. 
Oumoff's  address  with  which  I  do  not  agree.  Yet  I  shall  mention 
and  enumerate  the  questions  which  in  my  opinion  are  raised  by  the 
incompatibility  of  certain  principles. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  123 

The  contrast  between  the  vacuum  and  the  material  world  sounds 
almost  naive  after  the  just  quoted  words  of  Minkowsky  concerning 
the  necessity  of  a  transfer  of  attention,  on  the  part  of  science, 
from  purely  physical  problems  to  questions  of  consciousness. 
Moreover  I  do  not  see  any  fundamental  difference  between  the 
material,  the  mechanical,  and  the  electro-magnetic  universe.  All 
this  is  three-dimensional.  In  the  electro-magnetic  universe  there 
is  yet  no  true  transition  to  the  fourth  dimension.  And  Prof. 
Oumoff  makes  only  one  clear  attempt  to  bind  the  electro-magnetic 
world  with  the  higher  dimensions .    He  says : 

That  sheet  of  paper,  written  in  electro-magnetic  symbols,  with 
which  we  covered  the  vacuum,  it  is  possible  to  regard  as  billions  of 
separate  superimposed  sheets,  but  of  which  each  one  represents  the  field 
of  one  small  electric  quantity  or  charge. 

But  this  is  all.  The  rest  is  just  as  three-dimensional  as  the  theory 
of  atoms  and  the  ether. 

"We  are  present  at  the  funeral  of  the  old  physics,"  says  Prof. 
Oumoff,  and  this  is  true.  But  the  old  physics  is  losing  itself  and 
disappears  not  in  the  electro-magnetic  theory,  but  in  the  idea  of 
a  new  dimension  of  space  which  up  to  the  present  has  been  called 
time  and  motion. 

Truly,  the  new  physics  will  be  that  in  which  there  will  be  no 
motion,  i.  е.,  there  will  be  no  dualism  of  rest  and  motion,  nor  any 
dualism  of  matter  and  vacuum. 

Understanding  the  universe  as  thought  and  consciousness  we 
completely  divorce  ourselves  from  the  idea  of  a  vacuum.  And 
from  this  standpoint  is  explained  the  small  probability  of  matter 
to  which  Prof.  Oumoff  referred.  Matter,  i.  е.,  every  thing  finite,  is 
an  illusion  in  an  infinite  world. 

Among  many  attempts  at  the  investigation  of  the  fourth  dimen- 
sion I  shall  note  one  in  the  book  by  Johan  Van  Manen,  "Some 
Occult  Experiences." 

In  this  book  is  a  remarkable  drawing  of  a  four-dimensional 
figure  which  the  author  "saw"  by  means  of  his  inner  vision.  This 
interesting  experience  Van  Manen  describes  in  the  following  way : 

When  residing  and  touring  in  the  North  of  England,  several  years 
ago,  I  talked  and  lectured  several  times  on  the  fourth  dimension.  One 
day  after  having  retired  to  bed,  I  lay  fully  awake,  thinking  out  some 
problems  connected  with  this  subject.  I  tried  to  visualize  or  think  out 
the  shape  of  a  four-dimensional  cube,  which  I  imagined  to  be  the  simplest 


124  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

four-dimensional  shape.  To  my  great  astonishment  I  saw  plainly  before 
me  first  a  four-dimensional  globe  and  afterwards  a  four-dimensional  cube, 
and  learned  only  then  from  this  object-lesson  that  the  globe  is  the  sim- 
plest body,  and  not  the  cube,  as  the  third  dimensional  analogy  ought 
to  have  told  me  beforehand.  The  remarkable  thing  was  that  the  definite 
endeavor  to  see  the  one  thing  made  me  see  the  other.  I  saw  the  forms  as 
before  me  in  the  air  (though  the  room  was  dark),  and  behind  the  forms 
I  saw  clearly  a  rift  in  the  curtains  through  which  a  glimmer  of  light 
filtered  into  the  room.  This  was  a  case  in  which  I  can  clearly  fix  the 
impression  that  the  objects  seen  were  outside  my  head.  In  most 
of  the  other  cases  I  could  not  say  so  definitely,  as  they  partake 
of  a  dual  character,  being  almost  equally  felt  as  outside  and  inside 
the  brain. 

I  forego  the  attempt  to  describe  the  fourth-dimensional  cube  as  to 
its  form.  Mathematical  description  would  be  possible,  but  would 
at  the  same  time  disintegrate  the  real  impression  in  its  totality.  The 
fourth-dimensional  globe  can  be  better  described.  It  was  an  ordinary 
three-dimensional  globe,  out  of  which,  on  each  side,  beginning  at  its 
vertical  circumference,  bent,  tapering  horns  proceeded,  which,  with  a 
circular  bend,  united  their  points  above  the  globe  from  which  they 
started.  The  effect  is  best  indicated  by  circumscribing  the  numeral  8  by 
a  circle.  So  three  circles  are  formed,  the  lower  one  representing  the 
initial  globe,  the  upper  one  representing  empty  space,  and  the  greater 
circle  circumscribing  the  whole.  If  it  be  now  understood  that  the  upper 
circle  does  not  exist  and  the  lower  (small)  circle  is  identical  with  the 
outer  (large)  circle,  the  impression  will  have  been  conveyed,  at  least  to 
some  extent. 

I  have  always  been  easily  able  to  recall  this  globe;  to  recall  the  cube 
is  far  more  difficult,  and  I  have  to  concentrate  to  get  it  back. 

I  have  in  a  like  manner  had  rare  visions  of  fifth  and  sixth-dimensional 
figures.  At  least  I  have  felt  as  if  the  figures  I  saw  were  fifth  and  sixth- 
dimensional.  In  these  matters  the  greatest  caution  is  necessary.  I  am 
aware  that  I  have  come  into  contact  with  these  things  as  far  as  the  physical 
brain  allows  it,  without  denying  that  beyond  what  the  brain  has  caught 
there  was  something  further,  felt  at  the  time  which  was  not  handed  on. 
The  sixth-dimensional  figure  I  cannot  describe.  All  I  remember  of  it  is 
that  it  gave  me  at  the  time  an  impression  inform  of  what  we  might  call 
diversity  in  unity,  or  synthesis  in  differentiation.  The  fifth  dimensional 
vision  is  best  described,  or  rather  hinted  at,  by  saying  that  it  looked  like 
an  Alpine  relief  map,  with  the  singularity  that  all  mountain  peaks  and 
the  whole  landscape  represented  in  the  map  were  one  mountain,  or  again 
in  other  words  as  if  all  the  mountains  had  one  single  base.  This  was  the 
difference  between  the  fifth  and  the  sixth,  that  in  the  fifth  the  excres- 
cences were  in  one  sense  exteriorized  and  yet  rooted  in  the  same  unit; 
but  in  the  sixth  they  were  differentiated  but  not  exteriorized;  they  were 
only  in  different  ways  identical  with  the  same  base,  which  was  their 
whole. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  125 

С.  W.  Leadbeater  on  a  note  to  these  remarkable  pages  says: 

Striking  as  this  drawing  is,  its  value  lies  chiefly  in  its  suggestiveness 
to  those  who  have  once  seen  that  which  it  represents.  One  can  hardly 
hope  that  it  will  convey  a  clear  idea  of  the  reality  to  those  who  have  never 
seen  it.  It  is  difficult  to  get  an  animal  to  understand  a  picture — ap- 
parently because  he  is  incapable  of  grasping  the 
idea  that  perspective  on  a  flat  surface  is  in- 
tended to  represent  objects  which  he  knows 
only  as  solid.  The  average  man  is  in  exactly 
the  same  position  with  regard  to  any  drawing 
or  model  which  is  intended  to  suggest  to  him 
the  idea  of  the  fourth  dimension;  and  so,  clever 
and  suggestive  as  this  is,  I  doubt  whether  it 
will  be  of  much  help  to  the  average  reader. 

The  man  who  has  seen  the  reality  might  well 
be  helped  by  this  to  bring  into  his  ordinary  life 
a  flash  of  that  higher  consciousness;  and  in  that 
case  he  might  perhaps  be  able  to  supply,  in  his  thought,  what  must 
necessarily  be  lacking  in  the  physical-plane  drawing. 

For  my  part,  I  may  say  that  the  true  meaning  of  Van  Manen's 
"vision"  is  difficult  even  to  appreciate  with  the  means  at  our 
disposal.  After  seeing  the  drawing  in  his  book  I  at  once  felt  and 
understood  all  that  it  means,  but  I  disagree  somewhat  with  the 
author  in  the  interpretation  of  his  drawing.     He  says, 

"We  may  also  call  the  total  impression  that  of  a  ring.  I  think 
it  was  then  that  I  understood  for  the  first  time  that  so-called 
fourth-dimensional  sight  is  sight  with  reference  to  a  space-con- 
ception arising  from  the  visual  perception  of  density." 

This  remark  though  very  cautious  seems  to  me  dangerous,  be- 
cause it  creates  the  possibility  of  the  same  mistake  which  stopped 
Hinton  in  many  things  and  which  I  partly  repeated  in  the  first 
edition  of  the  book  "The  Fourth  Dimension."*  This  mistake 
consists  in  the  possibility  of  the  construction  of  some  pseudo 
fourth  dimension,  which  lies  in  substance  completely  in  three 
dimensions.  In  my  opinion  there  is  very  much  of  motion  in  the  figure. 
The  entire  figure  appears  to  me  as  a  moving  one,  continuously 
generating  itself,  as  though  it  were  at  the  point  of  contact  of  the 
acute  ends,  coming  from  there  and  involving  back  there.  But  I 
shall  not  analyze  and  comment  upon  Van  Manen's  experience 
now,  leaving  it  to  readers  who  have  had  similar  experiences. 

So  far  as  Van  Manen's  descriptions  of  his  observations  of  the 
"fifth"  and  "sixth"  dimensions  are  concerned,  it  seems  to  me  that 

*  One  of  P.  D.  Ouspensky's  books  in  Russian.     Transl. 


126  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

nothing  in  them  warrants  the  supposition  that  they  are  related 
to  any  region  higher  or  more  complex  than  the  four-dimensional 
world.  In  my  opinion  all  these  are  just  observations  of  the  region 
of  the  fourth  dimension.  But  the  similarity  to  the  experience  of 
certain  mystics  is  very  remarkable  in  them,  especially  those  of 
Jacob  Boehme.  Moreover  the  method  of  object  lesson  is  very 
interesting — i.  е.,  those  two  images  which  Van  Manen  saw  and 
from  the  comparison  of  which  he  deduced  his  conclusions.  To 
the  psychology  of  this  "object  lesson"  method  which  comes  from 
the  depths  of  consciousness,  I  hope  to  return  in  the  book  "The 
Wisdom  of  the  Gods"  in  a  chapter  on  experimental  mysticism. 


CHAPTER  XII 

Analysis  of  phenomena.  What  defines  different  orders  of  phenomena 
for  us?  Methods  and  forms  of  the  transition  of  one  order  of  phe- 
nomena into  another.  Phenomena  of  motion.  Phenomena  of  life. 
Phenomena  of  consciousness.  The  central  question  of  our  knowl- 
edge of  the  world:  what  mode  of  phenomena  is  generic  and  pro- 
duces the  others?  Can  the  origin  of  everything  lie  in  motion?  The 
laws  of  transformation  of  energy.  Simple  transformation  and 
liberation  of  latent  energy.  Different  liberating  forces  of  different 
orders  of  phenomena.  The  force  of  mechanical  energy,  the  force 
of  a  living  cell,  the  force  of  an  idea.  Phenomena  and  noumena  of 
our  world. 

HE  order  of  phenomena  is  defined  for  us,  first,  by  our 
method  of  apprehending  them,  and  second,  by  the 
form  of  the  transition  of  one  order  of  phenomena  into 
another. 

According  to  our  method  of  apprehending  them  and 
by  the  form  of  their  transition  into  one  another  we  discern  three 
orders  of  phenomena. 

Physical  phenomena  (i.  е.,  all  phenomena  studied  by  physics 
and  chemistry).  Phenomena  of  life  (all  phenomena  studied  by 
biology  and  its  subdivisions).  Phenomena  of  consciousness  (psychic 
and  spiritual  phenomena). 

We  know  physical  phenomena  by  means  of  our  sense  organs  or 
by  the  aid  of  apparatus.  Many  recogized  physical  phenomena  are 
not  observed  directly;  they  are  merely  projections  of  the 
assumed  causes  of  our  sensations,  or  those  of  the  causes  of  other 
phenomena.  Physics  recognizes  the  existence  of  many  phenomena 
which  have  never  been  observed  either  by  the  sense  organs  or  by 
means  of  apparatus  (the  temperature  of  absolute  zero,  for  ex- 
ample etc.). 

The  phenomena  of  life,  as  such,  are  not  observed  directly. 
We  cannot  project  them  as  the  cause  of  definite  sensations. 
But  certain  groups  of  sensations  force  us  to  assume  in  certain 
groups  of  physical  phenomena  the  presence  of  the  phenomena  of 
life.  It  may  be  said  that  a  certain  grouping  of  physical  phenomena 

127 


128  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

forces  us  to  assume  the  presence  of  the  phenomena  of  life. 
We  define  the  cause  of  the  phenomena  of  life  as  a  something  not 
capable  of  being  grasped  by  the  senses  nor  by  apparatus,  and 
incommensurable  with  the  causes  of  physical  sensations.  The 
sign  of  the  presence  of  the  phenomena  of  life  consists  in  the  power 
of  organisms  to  reproduce  themselves,  i.  е.,  the  multiplication  of 
them  in  the  same  forms. 

The  phenomena  of  consciousness  are  the  feelings  and  the 
thoughts  that  we  know  in  ourselves  by  direct  sensation — sub- 
jectively. We  assume  their  existence  in  others  (1)  from  analogy 
with  ourselves;  (2)  from  their  manifestation  in  actions  and  (3) 
from  that  which  we  gather  by  the  aid  of  speech.  But,  as  has  been 
shown  by  certain  philosophical  theories,  it  is  impossible  to  establish 
strictly  objectively,  the  presence  of  consciousnesses  other  than  our 
own.  A  man  establishes  this  usually  because  of  his  inner  assurance 
of  its  truth. 

Physical  phenomena  transform  themselves  into  one  another 
completely.  It  is  possible  to  transform  heat  into  light,  pressure 
into  motion,  etc.  It  is  possible  to  produce  any  physical 
phenomenon  from  other  physical  phenomena;  to  produce  any 
chemical  combination  by  the  synthetic  method,  combining  the 
composite  parts  in  proper  proportions  and  under  proper  physical 
conditions.  Modern  physics  assumes  electro-magnetic  phenomena 
as  the  basis  of  all  physical  phenomena.  But  physical  phenomena 
do  not  transform  themselves  into  the  phenomena  of  life.  By  no 
combination  of  physical  conditions  can  science  create  life,  just  as 
by  chemical  synthesis  it  cannot  create  living  matter — protoplasm. 
We  can  tell  what  amount  of  coal  is  necessary  to  generate  the  cer- 
tain amount  of  heat  necessary  to  transform  a  given  quantity  of 
ice  into  water;  but  we  cannot  tell  what  amount  of  coal  is  necessary 
to  create  the  vital  energy  with  which  one  living  cell  forms  another 
living  cell.  In  similar  manner  physical,  chemical  and  mechanical 
phenomena  cannot  themselves  produce  the  phenomena  of  con- 
sciousness, i.  е.,  of  thought.  Were  it  otherwise,  a  rotating  wheel, 
after  the  expenditure  of  a  certain  amount  of  energy,  or  after  the 
lapse  of  a  certain  time,  could  generate  an  idea.  Yet  we  know 
perfectly  well  that  the  wheel  can  go  on  rotating  for  millions  of 
years,  and  no  single  idea  will  be  produced  by  it  at  all.  Thus  we 
see  that  the  phenomena  of  motion  differ  in  a  fundamental  way 
from  the  phenomena  of  life  and  of  consciousness. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  129 

The  phenomena  of  life  change  into  other  phenomena  of  life, 
multiply  infinitely,  and  transform  themselves  unto  'physical  phe- 
nomena, generating  whole  series  of  mechanical  and  chemical 
combinations.  The  phenomena  of  life  manifest  themselves  to  us 
in  physical  phenomena,  and  in  the  existence  of  such  phenomena. 

The  phenomena  of  consciousness  are  sensed  subjectively,  and 
possessing  enormous  potential  force,  transform  themselves  into 
physical  phenomena  and  into  manifestations  of  life.  We  know 
that  at  the  basis  of  our  procreative  force  lies  desire — that  is, 
a  psychical  state,  or  a  phenomenon  of  consciousness.  Desire  is 
possessed  of  enormous  potential  force.  Out  of  the  united  desire 
of  a  man  and  of  a  woman,  a  whole  nation  may  come  into  being. 
At  the  root  of  the  active,  constructive,  creative  force  of  man, 
that  can  change  the  course  of  rivers,  unite  oceans,  cut  through 
mountains,  lies  the  will,  i.  е.,  again  a  psychical  state,  or  a  phe- 
nomenon of  consciousness.  Thus  the  phenomena  of  consciousness 
possess  even  greater  unifying  force  with  relation  to  physical 
phenomena  than  do  the  phenomena  of  life. 

Positive  philosophy  affirms  that  all  three  orders  of  phenomena 
proceed  from  one  cause  lying  within  the  sphere  of  the  study  of 
physics.  This  cause  is  called  by  different  names  at  different 
times,  but  it  is  assumed  to  be  identical  with  physical  energy  in 
general. 

Seriously  analyzing  such  an  affirmation,  it  is  easily  seen  to  be 
absolutely  arbitrary,  and  not  founded  upon  anything.  Physical 
phenomena  of  themselves,  inside  the  limits  of  our  existence  and 
observation,  never  create  the  phenomena  of  life  and  the  phenomena 
of  consciousness.  Consequently  we  may  with  greater  right 
assume  that  in  the  phenomena  of  life  and  in  the  phenomena  of 
consciousness  there  is  something  which  does  not  exist  in  physical 
phenomena.  

Moreover,  we  cannot  measure  physical,  biological,  and  psychic 
(or  spiritual)  phenomena  by  the  same  unit  of  measurement.  Or 
more  correctly,  we  cannot  measure  the  phenomena  of  life  and  the 
phenomena  of  consciousness  at  all.  It  is  only  the  phenomena  first 
mentioned,  i.  е.,  the  physical,  that  we  fancy  we  can  measure, 
though  this  is  very  doubtful,  too. 

In  any  case  we  undoubtedly  know  that  we  can  expect  neither 
the  phenomena  of  life  nor  the  phenomena  of  consciousness  in 


130  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

the  formulae  of  physical  phenomena;  and  generally  speaking  we 
have  for  them  no  formulae  at  all. 

In  order  to  clarify  the  relation  between  phenomena  of  different 
kinds,  let  us  examine  in  detail  the  laws  of  their  transformation 
one  into  another. 

First  of  all  it  is  necessary  to  consider  physical  phenomena,  and 
make  a  detailed  study  of  the  conditions  and  properties  of  their 
transformation   one   into    another. 

In  an  essay  on  Wundt  (The  Northern  Messenger,  1888)  A.  L. 
Volinsky,  elucidating  the  principles  of  Wundt's  physiological 
psychology,  says: 

The  actions  of  sensation  are  provoked  by  the  actions  of  irritation. 
But  both  these  actions  need  not  be  at  all  equal.  It  is  possible  to  burn  a 
whole  city  by  a  spark  from  a  cigarette.  It  is  necessary  to  understand 
why  this  is  possible.  Place  a  board  upon  the  edge  of  some  object  scale- 
wise,  so  that  it  will  balance.  On  both  ends  of  the  board  put  now  an  equal 
amount  of  weight.  The  weights  will  not  fall :  although  both  of  them  will 
tend  to  fall,  they  balance  one  another.  If  we  lift  the  least  weight  from 
one  end  of  the  board,  then  the  other  end  will  overbalance,  and  the  board 
will  fall— i.  е.,  the  force  of  gravity  which  existed  before  as  an  invisible 
tendency,  will  have  become  a  visible  motive  force.  If  we  put  the  board 
and  weights  on  the  earth,  the  force  of  gravity  will  not  produce  any  action, 
but  it  will  not  be  eliminated:  it  will  only  transform  itself  into  other 
forces. 

Those  forces  which  are  only  striving  to  produce  motion  are  called  con- 
strained, or  dead,  forces.  The  forces  which  are  actually  manifesting 
themselves  in  certain  definite  actions  are  called  free,  or  live  forces;  but 
as  regards  free  forces  it  is  necessary  to  differentiate  those  forces  which  are 
liberating,  setting  free,  from  the  forces  which  are  liberated,  or  set  free. 

An  enormous  difference  exists  between  the  liberation  of  force  and  its 
transformation  into  another.  . 

When  one  kind  of  motion  transforms  itself  into  another  kind,  the 
amount  of  free  force  remains  the  same;  and  contrariwise,  when  one  force 
liberates  another,  the  amount  of  free  force  changes.  The  free  force  of  an 
irritation  liberates  the  tied-up  forces  of  a  nerve.  And  this  liberation  of 
tied-up  forces  is  proceeding  at  each  point  of  the  nerve.  The  first  mo- 
tion increases  like  a  fire,  like  a  snow-slide  carrying  along  with  it  new  and 
ever  new  snow  drifts.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  the  action  (phenomenon) 
of  sensation  need  not  be  exactly  equal  to  the  action  of  irritation. 

Let  us  look  more  broadly  at  the  relation  between  liberated  and 
liberating  forces  in  the  different  kinds  of  phenomena. 

We  shall  discover  that  sometimes  an  almost  negligible  amount 
of  physical  force  may  liberate  an  enormous,  a  colossal  quantity  of 
physical  energy.     But  all  that  we  can  ever  assemble  of  physical 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  131 

force  is  powerless  to  liberate  a  single  iota  of  that  vital  energy 
necessary  for  the  independent  existence  of  a  single  microscopic 
living  organism. 

The  force  contained  in  living  organisms,  the  vital  force,  is  ca- 
pable of  liberating  infinitely  greater  amounts  of  vital  and  also 
of  physical  energy  than  the  force  of  motion. 

The  microscopic  living  cell  is  capable  of  infinite  dissemination, 
to  evolve  new  species,  to  cover  continents  with  vegetation,  to 
fill  the  oceans  with  seaweed,  to  build  islands  out  of  coral,  to  deposit 
powerful  layers  of  coal,  etc.,  etc. 

Concerning  the  latent  energy  contained  in  the  phenomena  of 
consciousness,  i.  е.,  in  thoughts,  feelings,  desires,  and  in  will,  we 
discover  that  its  potentiality  is  even  more  immeasurable,  more 
boundless.  From  personal  experience,  from  observation,  from 
history,  we  know  that  ideas,  feelings,  will,  manifesting  themselves, 
can  liberate  enormous  quantities  of  energy,  and  create  infinite 
series  of  .phenomena.  An  idea  can  act  for  centuries  and  millen- 
niums and  only  grow  and  deepen,  evoking  ever  new  series  of  phe- 
nomena, liberating  ever  fresh  energy.  We  know  that  thoughts  con- 
tinue to  live  and  act  when  even  the  very  name  of  the  man  who 
created  them  has  been  converted  into  a  myth,  like  the  names  of 
the  founders  of  ancient  religions,  the  creators  of  the  immortal 
poetical  works  of  antiquity — heroes,  leaders,  prophets.  Their 
words  are  repeated  by  innumerable  lips,  their  ideas  are  studied 
and  commented  upon.  Their  preserved  works  are  translated, 
printed,  read,  studied,  staged,  illustrated.  And  this  is  done  not 
only  with  the  masterpieces  of  men  of  genius,  but  some  single  little 
verse  may  live  millenniums,  making  hundreds  of  men  work  for 
it,  serve  it,  in  order  to  transmit  it  further. 

Observe  how  much  of  potential  energy  there  is  in  some  little 
verse  of  Pushkin  or  Lermontoff:  This  energy  acts  not  only 
upon  the  feelings  of  men,  but  by  reason  of  its  very  existence  it 
acts  upon  their  will.  See  how  vital  and  immortal  are  the  words, 
thoughts  and  feelings  of  half -mythical  Homer — how  much 
of  "motion"  each  word  of  his,  during  the  time  of  its  existence, 
has  evoked. 

Undoubtedly  each  thought  of  a  poet  contains  enormous 
potential  force,  like  the  power  confined  in  a  piece  of  coal  or 
in  a  living  cell,  but  infinitely  more  subtle,  imponderable  and 
potent. 


132  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

This  remarkable  correlation  of  phenomena  may  be  expressed 
in  the  following  terms :  the  farther  a  given  phenomenon  is  from  the 
visible  and  sensed — from  the  physical — the  farther  it  is  from 
matter,  the  more  there  is  in  it  of  hidden  force,  the  greater  the  quan- 
tity of  phenomena  it  can  produce,  can  leave  in  its  wake,  the 
greater  amount  of  energy  it  can  liberate,  and  so  the  less  it  is 
dependent  upon  time. 

If  we  would  correlate  all  of  the  above  with  the  principle  of 
physics  that  the  amount  of  energy  is  constant,  then  we  must  state 
more  exactly  that  in  the  preceding  discussion  nothing  has  been 
said  of  the  creation  of  new  energy,  but  of  the  liberation  of  latent 
force.  And  we  have  found  that  the  liberating  force  of  life  and 
thought  is  infinitely  greater  than  the  liberating  force  of  mechanical 
motion  and  of  chemical  reactions.  The  microscopic  living  cell  is 
more  powerful  than  a  volcano — the  idea  is  more  powerful  than  the 
geological  cataclysm. 

Having  established  these  differences  between  phenomena,  let 
us  endeavor  to  discover  what  phenomena  themselves  represent, 
taken  by  themselves,  independently  of  our  receptivity  and  sensa- 
tion of  them. 

We  at  once  discover  that  we  know  nothing  about  them. 

We  know  a  phenomenon  just  as  much  and  just  as  far  as  it  is 
irritation,  i.  е.,  to  the  extent  that  it  provokes  sensation. 

The  positivistic  philosophy  sees  mechanical  motion  or  electro- 
magnetic energy  as  the  basis  of  all  phenomena.  But  the 
hypothesis  of  vibrating  atoms  or  of  units  of  energy — electrons 
and  cycles  of  motion,  combinations  of  which  create  different 
"phenomena" — is  only  an  hypothesis,  built  upon  a  perfectly 
arbitrary  and  artificial  assumption  concerning  the  existence  of 
the  world  in  time  and  space.  Just  as  soon  as  we  discover  that 
the  conditions  of  time  and  space  are  merely  the  properties 
of  our  sensuous  receptivity,  we  absolutely  destroy  the  validity  of 
the  hypothesis  of  "energy"  as  the  foundation  of  everything; 
because  time  and  space  are  necessary  for  energy,  i.  е.,  it  is  nec- 
essary for  time  and  space  to  be  properties  of  the  world  and  not 
properties  of  consciousness. 

Thus  in  reality  we  know  nothing  about  the  causes  of  phenomena. 

We  do  know  that  some  combinations  of  causes,  acting  through 
the  organism  upon  our  consciousness,  produce  the  series  of  sen- 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  133 

sations  which  we  recognize  as  a  green  tree.  But  we  do  not  know  if 
this  perception  of  a  tree  corresponds  to  the  real  substance  of  the 
causes  which  evoked  this  sensation. 

The  question  concerning  the  relation  of  the  phenomenon  to 
the  thing-in-itself,  i.  е.,  to  the  indwelling  reality,  has  been  from  far 
back  the  chief  and  most  difficult  concern  of  philosophy.  Can  we, 
studying  phenomena,  get  at  the  very  cause  of  them,  at  the  very 
substance  of  things?  Kant  has  said  definitely:  No! — by  studying 
phenomena  we  do  not  even  approach  to  the  understanding  of 
things  in  themselves.  Recognizing  the  correctness  of  Kant's  view, 
if  we  desire  to  approach  to  an  understanding  of  things  in  them- 
selves, we  must  seek  an  entirely  different  method,  an  utterly 
different  path  from  that  which  positive  science  is  treading, 
which   studies  phenomena. 


CHAPTER  ХШ 

The  apparent  and  the  hiddej >  side £  Ше  *^£&£&1 
the  phenomenal  side  of  We.  °^w™\^f  ™^пй  Qf  everything 
ity"  of  positive  phdosophy  consist?    The  regarding  °г  e      *ы  £ 

SSH  в S£5 fib  Pbe-шепа.   The  „ew  appre- 
hension  of  the  world. 

IHERE  exist  visible  and  hidden  causes  of  phenomena; 
'   there  exist  also  visible  and  hidden  effects. 
Let  us  consider  some  one  example. 
In  all  textbooks  on  the  history  of  literature  we  are 
told  that  in  its  time  Goethe's  "Werther"  provoked 
an  epidemic  of  suicides. 

What  did  provoke  these  suicides? 

Let  us  imagine  that  some  "scientist'  appears,  who,  bang  m 
terested  in  the  fact  of  the  increase  of  suicides,  begins  to  study  the 
first  edition  of  "Werther"  according  to  the  me  hod  rf  exact 
positive  science.    He  weighs  the  book,  measures  it  by  the  most 
precise  instruments,  notes  the  number  of  its  page*    «■*■£ 
chemical  analysis  of  the  paper  and  the  ink,  counts  the  number 
oHmes  on  cve'ry  page,  the  number  of  letters,  and  even  how  m 
times  the  letter  A  is  repeated,  how  many  times  the  letter  B,  and 
how  manv  times  the  interrogation  mark  is  used,  and  so  on.    in 
other  words  he  does  everything  that  the  pious  Mohammedan  P- 
forms  with  relation  to  the  Koran  of  Mohammed,  and  on  the  bam 
of  his  investigations  writes  a  treatise  on  the  relation  of  the  letter  A 
of  the  German  alphabet  to  suicide.  hktorv  of 

Or  let  us  imagine  another  scientist  who  studies  the  history  ot 
painting,  and  deciding  to  put  it  on  a  scientific  basis,  starts  a 
big  hy  series  of  analyses  of  the  pigment  used  in  Ше ^  * 
famous  painters  in  order  to  discover  the  causes  of  the  diffeient 
Sessions  produced  upon  the  beholder  by  different  pictures. 

135 


136  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

Imagine  a  savage  studying  a  watch.  Let  us  admit  that  he  is  a 
wise  and  crafty  savage.  He  takes  the  watch  apart  and  counts 
all  its  wheels  and  screws,  counts  the  number  of  teeth  in  each  gear, 
finds  out  its  size  and  thickness.  The  only  thing  that  he  does  not 
know  is  what  all  these  things  are  for.  He  does  not  know  that  the 
hand  completes  the  circuit  of  the  dial  in  half  of  twenty -four  hours, 
i.  е.,  that  it  is  possible  to  tell  time  by  means  of  a  watch. 

All  this  is  "positivism." 

We  are  too  familiar  with  "positivistic"  methods,  and  so  fail 
to  realize  that  they  end  in  absurdities  and  that  if  we  are  seeking 
to  explain  the  meaning  of  anything,  they  do  not  lead  to  the  goal  at 
all. 

The  difficulty  is  that  for  the  explanation  of  the  meaning  posi- 
tivism is  of  no  use.  For  it  nature  is  a  closed  book  of  which  it 
studies  the  appearance  only. 

In  the  matter  of  the  study  of  the  operations  of  nature,  the 
positive  methods  have  achieved  much,  as  is  proven  by  the 
innumerable  successes  of  modern  technics,  including  the  conquest 
of  the  air.  But  everything  in  the  world  has  its  own  definite 
sphere  of  action.  Positivism  is  very  good  when  it  seeks  an 
answer  to  the  question  of  how  something  operates  under  given 
conditions;  but  when  it  makes  the  attempt  to  get  outside  of  its 
definite  conditions  (space,  time,  causation),  or  presumes  to  affirm 
that  nothing  exists  outside  of  these  given  conditions,  then  it  is 
transcending  its  own  proper  sphere. 

It  is  true  that  the  more  serious  positive  thinkers  deny  the  possi- 
bility of  including  in  "positive  investigation"  the  question  of  why 
and  what  for.  The  search  for  meaning,  and  for  that  which  is  the 
aim  and  end  of  teleology,  is  regarded  by  the  positive  philosopher 
as  little  short  of  absurd.  This  is  indeed  the  more  true  because 
from  the  positive  standpoint  teleology  is  indeed  an  absurdity.  But, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  positive  standpoint  is  not  the  only  possible 
one.  The  usual  mistake  of  positivism  consists  in  its  not  seeing 
anything  except  itself — it  either  considers  everything  as  possible 
to  it,  or  considers  as  generally  impossible  much  that  is  entirely 
possible,  but  not  for  positive  inquiry. 

Humanity  will  never  cease  to  search,  however,  for  answer  to 
the  questions  why,  and  wherefore. 

The  positivistic  scientist  finds  himself  in  the  presence  of  nature 
almost  in  the  position  of  a  savage  in  a  library  of  rare  and  valuable 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  137 

books.  For  a  savage  a  book  is  a  thing  of  definite  size  and  weight. 
However  long  he  may  ask  himself  what  purpose  this  strange 
thing  serves,  he  will  never  discover  the  truth  from  its  appearance; 
and  the  contents  of  the  book  will  remain  for  him  the  incomprehensi- 
ble noumenon.  In  like  manner  the  contents  of  nature  are  incom- 
prehensible to  the  positivistic  scientist. 

But  if  a  man  knows  of  the  existence  of  the  contents  of  the  book — 
the  noumenon  of  life — if  he  knows  that  a  mysterious  meaning  is 
hidden  under  visible  phenomena,  there  is  the  possibility  that  in 
the  long  run  he  will  discover  the  contents. 

For  success  in  this  it  is  necessary  to  grasp  the  idea  of  the  inner 
contents,  i.  е.,  the  meaning  of  the  thing  in  itself. 

The  scientist  who  discovers  little  tablets  with  hieroglyphics  or 
wedge-shaped  inscriptions  in  an  unknown  language,  deciphers 
and  reads  them  after  great  labors.  And  in  order  to  accomplish 
this  he  needs  only  one  thing :  it  is  necessary  for  him  to  know  that 
these  little  signs  represent  an  inscription.  So  long  as  he  regards 
them  simply  as  an  ornament,  as  the  outside  embellishment  of 
little  tablets,  or  as  an  accidental  tracing  without  meaning — up  to 
that  time  their  meaning  and  significance  will  be  closed  to  him 
absolutely.  But  let  him  only  assume  the  existence  of  that  mean- 
ing and  the  possibility  of  its  comprehension  will  be  already  within 
sight. 

No  secret  cipher  exists  which  cannot  be  solved  without  the  aid 
of  any  key.  But  it  is  necessary  to  know  that  it  is  a  cipher.  This  is 
the  first  and  necessary  condition.  Lacking  this  it  is  impossible 
to  accomplish  anything. 


The  idea  of  the  existence  of  the  visible  and  the  hidden  sides  of 
life  was  known  to  philosophy  long  ago.  Phenomena  were  regarded 
as  only  one  aspect  of  the  world — seeming,  not  existing  really,  aris- 
ing in  consciousness  at  the  moment  of  its  contact  with  the  real 
world.  Another  side,  noumena,  was  recognized  as  really  existing 
in  itself,  but  inaccessible  for  our  receptivity. 

But  there  is  no  greater  error  than  to  regard  the  world  as  divided 
into  phenomena  and  noumena — to  conceive  of  phenomena  and 
noumena  apart  from  one  another,  and  susceptible  of  being  sepa- 
rately known.  This  is  philosophic  illiteracy,  which  shows  itself 
most  clearly  in  the  dualistic  spiritistic  theories.    The  division  into 


138  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

phenomena  and  noumena  exists  only  in  our  minds.  The  "phe- 
nomenal world"  is  simply  our  incorrect  perception  of  the  world. 

As  Carl  DuPrel  has  said,  "  The  world  beyond  is  this  world, 
only  perceived  strangely :"  It  would  be  more  accurate  to  say,  that 
this  world  is  the  world  beyond  perceived  strangely. 

Kant's  idea  is  quite  correct,  that  the  study  of  the  phenomenal 
side  of  the  world  will  not  bring  us  any  nearer  to  the  understanding 
of  "things-in-themselves."  The  "  thing-in-itself " — that  is  the 
thing  as  it  exists  in  itself,  independently  of  us.  The  "phenomenon 
of  the  thing" — that  is  the  thing  in  such  semblance  as  we  perceive 
it. 

The  example  of  a  book  in  the  hands  of  an  illiterate  savage  shows 
us  quite  clearly  that  it  is  sufficient  not  to  know  about  the  existence 
of  the  noumenon  of  a  thing  (the  contents  of  the  book  in  this  case) 
in  order  that  it  shall  not  manifest  itself  in  phenomena.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  knowledge  of  its  existence  is  sufficient  to  make 
possible  its  discovery  with  the  aid  of  the  very  phenomena  which, 
without  the  knowledge  of  the  noumena,  would  be  perfectly  use- 
less. 

Just  as  it  is  impossible  for  a  savage  to  attain  to  an  understand- 
ing of  the  nature  of  a  watch  by  a  study  of  its  phenomenal  side — 
the  number  of  wheels,  and  the  number  of  teeth  in  each  gear — so 
also  for  the  positivistic  scientist,  studying  the  external,  manifest- 
ing side  of  life,  its  secret  raison  d'etre  and  the  aim  of  separate 
manifestations  will  be  forever  hidden. 

To  the  savage  the  watch  will  be  an  extremely  interesting,  com- 
plicated, but  entirely  useless  toy.  Somewhat  after  this  manner  a 
man  appears  to  the  scientist-materialist — a  mechanism  infinitely 
more  complex,  but  equally  unknown  as  regards  the  purpose  for 
which  it  exists  and  the  manner  of  its  creation. 

We  pictured  to  ourselves  how  incomprehensible  the  functions 
of  a  candle  and  of  a  coin  would  be  for  a  plane-man,  studying  two 
similar  circles  on  his  plane.  In  like  manner  the  functions  of  a  man 
are  incomprehensible  to  the  scientist,  studying  him  as  a  mechan- 
ism. The  reason  for  this  is  clear.  It  is  because  the  coin  and  the 
candle  are  not  two  similar  circles,  but  two  quite  different  objects, 
having  an  entirely  different  use  and  meaning  in  that  world  which 
is  relatively  higher  than  the  plane — and  man  is  not  a  mechanism, 
but  something  having  an  aim  and  meaning  in  the  world  relatively 
higher  than  the  visible  one. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  139 

The  functions  of  a  candle  and  of  a  coin  in  our  world  are  for  the 
imaginary  plane-man  an  inaccessible  noumenon.  It  is  evident  that 
the  phenomenon  of  a  circle  cannot  give  any  understanding  of  the 
function  of  a  candle,  and  its  difference  from  the  function  of  a  coin. 
But  two-dimensional  knowledge  exists  not  alone  on  the  plane. 
Materialistic  thought  tries  to  apply  it  to  real  life.  A  curious  result 
follows,  the  true  meaning  of  which  is,  unhappily,  incompre- 
hensible to  many  people.  One  of  such  applications  is  "the 
economic  man" — this  is  quite  clearly  the  two-dimensional  and 
flat  being  moving  in  two  directions — those  of  production  and 
consumption — i.  е.,  living  upon  the  plane  of  production-consump- 
tion. How  is  it  possible  to  imagine  man  in  general  as  such  an 
obviously  artificial  being?  And  how  is  it  possible  to  hope  to 
understand  the  laws  of  the  life  of  man,  with  his  complex  spiritual 
aspirations  and  his  great  impulse  to  know,  to  understand  every- 
thing around  about  him  and  within  himself — by  studying  the 
imaginary  laws  of  the  imaginary  being  upon  an  imaginary  plane? 
The  inventors  of  this  theory  alone  possess  the  secret  of  the 
answer  to  this  question.  But  the  economic  theory  of  human  life 
attracts  men  as  do  all  simple  theories  giving  a  short  answer  to  a 
series  of  complicated  questions.  And  we  are  ourselves  too  en- 
tangled in  materialistic  theories  to  see  anything  beyond  them. 


Positivistic  science  in  essence  does  not  deny  the  theory  of  phe- 
nomena and  noumena,  it  only  affirms  in  opposition  to  Kant, 
that  in  studying  phenomena  we  are  gradually  approaching  to 
noumena.  The  noumena  of  phenomena  science  considers  to  be 
the  motion  of  atoms  and  the  ether,  or  the  vibrations  of  electrons; 
it  conceives  of  the  universe  as  a  whirl  of  mechanical  motion  or 
the  field  of  manifestation  of  electro-magnetic  energy  taking  on 
the  "phenomenal  tint"  for  us  on  their  reception  by  the  organs 
of  sense. 

"Materialism"  or  "energetics"  affirm  that  the  phenomena 
of  life  and  of  consciousness  are  simply  the  functions  of  physical 
phenomena,  that  without  physical  phenomena  the  phenomena  of 
life  and  of  consciousness  cannot  exist  and  that  they  represent  only 
certain  complex  combinations  of  the  foregoing.  Materialism  af- 
firms that  the  phenomena  of  consciousness  are  created  out  of 
external   irritations    refracted    in    a    living   organism — that    all 


140  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

psychic  and  spiritual  life  has  evolved  out  of  the  simple  irrita- 
bility of  a  cell,  i.  е.,  out  of  the  faculty  to  respond  by  motion  to 
extraneous  irritation — that  all  these  three  kinds  of  phenomena  are 
one  and  the  same  thing  in  substance — and  the  higher,  i.  е.,  the 
phenomena  of  life  and  of  consciousness,  are  only  different  ex- 
pressions of  the  lower,  i.  е.,  of  one  and  the  same  energy. 

But  to  all  this  it  is  possible  to  answer  one  thing.  If  it  were  true 
it  would  have  been  proven  long  ago.  Nothing  is  easier  than  to 
prove  the  energetic  hypothesis  of  life  and  consciousness.  Just 
create  life  and  consciousness  by  the  mechanical  method.  Material- 
ism and  energetics  are  those  "obvious"  theories  which  cannot  be 
true  without  proofs,  because  they  cannot  not  have  proofs  if  they 
contain  even  a  little  grain  of  truth. 

But  there  are  no  proofs  at  the  disposition  of  these  theories; 
quite  the  reverse:  the  infinitely  greater  potentiality  of  the  phe- 
nomena of  life  and  of  consciousness  compared  with  physical  phe- 
nomena assures  us  of  the  exact  opposite.  And  we  have  a  full  right 
to  declare  that  energetics  is  just  as  subjective  a  theory  as  any 
doctrine  of  dogmatic  theology. 

The  simple  fact,  above  shown,  of  the  enormous  liberating,  un- 
binding force  of  the  phenomena  of  consciousness  is  sufficient  to 
establish  quite  really  and  firmly  the  problem  of  the  world  of  the 
hidden. 

And  the  world  of  the  hidden  cannot  be  the  world  of  uncon- 
scious mechanical  motion,  of  unconscious  development  of  electro- 
magnetic forces.  The  positivistic  theory  admits  the  possibility  of 
explaining  the  higher  through  the  lower,  the  invisible  through  the 
visible.  But  it  has  been  shown  at  the  very  beginning  that  this  is 
the  explanation  of  one  unknown  by  another  unknown.  There  is 
still  less  justification  for  explaining  the  known  through  the  un- 
known. Yet  that  lower  (matter  and  motion)  through  which  the 
positivists  strive  to  explain  the  "higher"  (life  and  thought)  is 
itself  unknown.  Consequently  it  is  impossible  to  explain  and 
define  anything  else  in  terms  of  it,  while  the  higher,  i.  е.,  the 
thought,  this  is  our  sole  known:  it  is  this  alone  that  we  do  know, 
that  we  are  conscious  of  in  ourselves,  that  we  can  neither  mistake 
nor  doubt.  And  if  thought  can  evoke  or  unbind  physical 
energy,  and  motion  can  never  create  or  unbind  thought  (out  of  a 
revolving  wheel  no  thought  ever  arose)  so  of  course  we  shall  strive 
to  define,  not  the  higher  in  terms  of  the  lower,  but  the  lower  in 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  141 

terms  of  the  higher.  If  the  invisible,  like  the  contents  of  a  book 
or  the  purpose  of  a  watch,  defines  by  itself  the  visible,  so  also  we 
shall  endeavor  to  understand  not  the  visible,  but  the  invisible. 

Starting  from  a  false  assumption  concerning  the  mechamcahty 
of  the  noumenal  side  of  nature,  positive  science,  upon  which  the 
view  of  the  world  of  the  intelligent  majority  of  contemporary 
humanity  is  founded,  makes  still  another  mistake  in  regard  to 
cause  and  effect,  or  the  law  of  functions— that  is,  it  mistakes  what 
is  cause,  and  what  is  effect. 


Just  as  the  two-dimensional  plane-man  thinks  of  all  phe- 
nomena touching  his  consciousness  as  lying  on  one  plane,  so  the 
positivistic  scientist  strives  to  interpret  upon  one  plane  all  phe- 
nomena of  different  orders,  i.  е.,  to  interpret  all  visible  phenomena 
as  the  effects  of  other  visible  phenomena,  and  as  the  inevitable 
cause  of  subsequent  visible  phenomena.  In  other  words,  he  sees 
in  causal  and  functional  interdependence  merely  phenomena  pro- 
ceeding upon  the  surface,  and  studies  the  visible  world,  or  the 
phenomena  of  the  visible  world,  not  admitting  that  causes  can 
enter  into  this  world  which  are  not  contained  in  it  or  that  the 
phenomena  of  this  world  can  possess  functions  extending  beyond  it. 

But  this  could  be  true  only  in  case  there  were  no  phenomena  of 
life  and  of  consciousness  in  the  world,  or  if  the  phenomena  of  life 
and  of  consciousness  were  really  derivatives  from  physical  phe- 
nomena, and  did  not  possess  infinitely  greater  latent  force  than 
they.  Then  only  would  we  have  the  right  to  consider  the  chains 
of  phenomena  in  their  physical  or  visible  sequence  alone,  as  posi- 
tivistic science  does.  But  taking  into  consideration  the  phe- 
nomena of  life  and  of  consciousness  we  shall  inevitably  recognize 
that  the  chain  of  phenomena  often  translates  itself  from  a  sequence 
purely  physical  to  a  biological  sequence,  i.  е.,  one  in  which  there 
is  much  of  the  hidden  and  invisible  to  us — or  to  a  psychological 
sequence  where  there  is  even  more  of  the  hidden;  but  during  re- 
verse translations  from  biological  and  psychological  spheres  into 
physical  sequences  actions  proceed  often,  if  not  always,  from 
regions  which  are  hidden  from  us;  i.  е.,  the  cause  of  the  visible  is 
the  invisible.  In  consequence  of  this  we  must  admit  that  it  is  im- 
possible to  consider  the  chains  of  sequences  in  the  world  of  phys- 
ical phenomena  only.    When  this  sequence  touches  the  life  of  a 


142  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

man  or  that  of  a  human  society,  we  perceive  clearly  that  it  escapes 
from  the  "physical  sphere"  and  returns  into  it.  Regarding  the 
matter  from  this  standpoint  we  see  that,  just  as  in  the  life  of  one 
man  and  in  the  life  of  a  society,  there  are  many  streams,  at  times 
appearing  on  the  surface  and  spouting  up  in  boisterous  torrents, 
and  at  other  times  disappearing  deep  underground,  hidden  from 
view,  but  only  waiting  for  their  moment  to  appear  again  on  the 
surface. 

We  observe  in  the  world  continuous  chains  of  phenomena  and 
we  perceive  how  these  chains  shift  from  one  order  of  phenomena 
to  another  without  a  break.  We  observe  how  the  phenomena  of 
consciousness — thoughts,  feelings,  desires — are  accompanied  by 
physiological  phenomena — creating  them  perhaps — and  inaugurate 
a  series  of  purely  physical  phenomena;  and  we  see  how  physical 
phenomena,  becoming  the  object  of  sensations  of  sight,  hearing, 
touch,  smell  and  the  like,  induce  physiological  phenomena,  and 
then  psychological.  But  looking  at  life  from  that  side,  we  see  only 
physical  phenomena,  and  having  assured  ourselves  that  it  is  the 
only  reality  we  may  not  notice  the  others  at  all.  Herein  appears 
the  enormous  power  of  suggestion  in  current  ideas.  To  a  sincere 
positivist  any  metaphysical  argument  proving  the  unreality  of 
matter  or  energy  seems  sophistry.  It  strikes  him  as  a  thing  un- 
necessary, disagreeable,  hindering  a  logical  train  of  thought,  an 
assault  without  aim  or  meaning  on  that  which  in  his  opinion  is 
firmly  established,  alone  immutable,  lying  at  the  foundation  of 
everything.  He  vexedly  fans  away  from  himself  all  "idealistic" 
or  "mystical"  theories  as  he  would  a  buzzing  mosquito. 

But  the  fact  is  that  thought  and  energy  are  different  in  substance 
and  cannot  be  one  and  the  same  thing,  because  thought  is  a  sub- 
jective phenomenon  and  energy  an  objective  one.  For  if  we  open 
the  cranium  of  a  living  man  in  order  to  observe  all  the  vibrations 
of  the  cells  of  the  gray  matter  of  the  brain,  and  all  the  quivering 
white  fibres,  in  spite  of  everything  there  will  be  merely  motion,  and 
thought  will  remain  somewhere  beyond  the  limits  of  investiga- 
tion, retreating  like  a  shadow  at  every  approach.  The  "posi- 
tivist," when  he  begins  to  realize  this,  feels  that  the  ground  is 
quaking  underneath  his  feet,  feels  that  by  his  method  he  will 
never  approach  to  the  thought.  Then  he  sees  clearly  the  necessity 
for  a  new  method.  As  soon  as  he  begins  to  think  about  it  he  begins 
quite  unexpectedly  to  notice  things  around  him  which  he  did  not 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  143 

see  before.  His  eyes  begin  to  open  to  that  which  he  did  not  wish 
to  see  before.  The  walls  which  he  had  erected  around  himse  f 
begin  to  fall  one  after  another,  and  behind  the  falling  walls 
infinite  horizons  of  possible  knowledge,  hitherto  undreamed  of, 

unroll  before  him. 

Thereupon  he  completely  alters  his  view  of  everything  sur- 
rounding him.  He  understands  that  the  visible  is  produced  by  the 
invisible;  and  that  without  understanding  the  invisible  it  is  im- 
possible to  understand  the  visible.  His  "positivism  begins  to 
totter  and,  if  he  is  a  man  with  a  bold  thought,  then  in  some  splendid 
moment  he  will  perceive  those  things  which  he  was  wont  to  regard 
as  real  and  true  to  be  unreal  and  false,  and  those  things  regarded 
as  false  to  be  real  and  true. 

First  of  all  he  will  see  that  manifested  physical  phenomena  otten 
hide  themselves,  like  a  stream  which  has  gone  underground  Yet 
they  do  not  disappear  altogether,  but  continue  to  exist  in  latent 
form  in  some  consciousness,  in  someone's  memory,  in  the  words  or 
books  of  someone,  just  as  the  future  harvest  is  latent  m  the  seeds. 
And  thereafter  they  again  burst  into  light,  out  of  this  latent  state 
they  come  into  an  apparent  one,  making  a  roar,  reverbation,  mo- 

tl0We  observe  such  transitions  of  the  invisible  into  the  visible  in 
the  personal  life  of  man,  in  the  life  of  peoples,  and  in  the  history 
of  humanity.  These  chains  of  events  go  on  continuously,  inter- 
weaving among  themselves,  entering  one  into  another,  sometimes 
hidden  from  our  eyes,  and  sometimes  visible. 

I  find  an  artistic  description  of  this  idea  in  the  chapter  on 
"Karma"  in  "Light  on  the  Path"  by  Mabel  Collins.* 

Consider  with  me  that  the  individual  existence  is  a  rope .which 
stretches  from  the  infinite  to  the  infinite,  and  has  no  end  and  no  com- 
mencement^ neither  is  it  capable  of  being  broken.  Tins  rope  is  formed 
of  innumerable  fine  threads,  which  lying  closely  togethe *  *°^J™fc 
ness.  .  .  .  and  remember  that  the  threads  are  living— are  like  electric 
wires;  more,  are  like  quivering  nerves.    .    . 

But  eventually  the  long  strands,  the  living  threads  which  in  their  un- 
brokencontinue  form  the  individual,  pass  out  of  the  shadow  into  the 

5  This  illustration  presents  but  a  small  portion-a  single  side  of  the 
truth:  it  is  less  than  a  fragment.  Yet  dwell  on  it;  by  its  aid  you  may  he 
led  to  perceive  more.  What  it  is  necessary  first  to  understand  is  not  that 
the  future  is  formed  by  any  separate  acts  of  the  present,  but  that  the 

^Theosophical  Publishing  Co.,  London,  1912,  pp.  96-98. 


144  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

whole  of  the  future  is  in  unbroken  continuity  with  the  present,  as  the 
present  is  with  the  past.  In  the  plane,  from  one  point  of  view,  the 
illustration  of  the  rope  is  correct. 

The  passages  quoted  show  us  that  the  idea  of  karma,  developed 
in  remote  antiquity  by  Hindu  philosophy,  embodies  the  idea  of 
the  unbroken  consecutiveness  of  phenomena.  Each  phenomenon, 
no  matter  how  insignificant,  is  a  link  of  an  infinite  and  unbroken 
chain,  extending  from  the  past  into  the  future,  passing  from  one 
sphere  into  another,  sometimes  manifesting  as  physical  phe- 
nomena, sometimes  hiding  in  the  phenomena  of  consciousness. 

If  we  regard  karma  from  the  standpoint  of  our  theory  of  time 
and  space  of  many  dimensions,  then  the  connection  between  distant 
events  will  cease  to  be  wonderful  and  incomprehensible.  If  events 
most  distant  from  one  another  in  relation  to  time  touch  one  another 
in  the  fourth  dimension,  this  means  that  they  are  proceeding  sim- 
ultaneously as  cause  and  effect,  and  the  walls  dividing  them  are 
just  an  illusion  which  our  weak  intellect  cannot  conquer.  Things 
are  united,  not  by  time,  but  by  an  inner  connection,  an  inner  cor- 
relation. And  time  cannot  separate  those  things  which  are  in- 
wardly near,  following  one  from  another.  Certain  other  proper- 
ties of  these  things  force  us  to  think  of  them  as  being  separated 
by  the  ocean  of  time.  But  we  know  that  this  ocean  does  not 
exist  in  reality  and  we  begin  to  understand  how  and  why  the 
events  of  one  millennium  can  directly  influence  the  events  of 
another  millennium. 

The  hidden  activity  of  events  becomes  comprehensible  to  us. 
We  understand  that  the  events  must  become  hidden  in  order  to 
preserve  for  us  the  illusion  of  time. 

We  know  this — know  that  the  events  of  to-day  were  the  ideas 
and  feelings  of  yesterday — and  that  the  events  of  tomorrow  are 
lying  in  someone's  irritation,  in  someone's  hunger,  in  someone's 
suffering,  and  possibly  still  more  in  someone's  imagination,  in 
someone's  fantasy,  in  someone's  dreams. 

We  know  all  this,  yet  nevertheless  our  "positive"  science  ob- 
stinately seeks  to  establish  correlations  between  visible  phe- 
nomena only,  i.  е.,  to  regard  each  visible  or  physical  phenomenon 
as  the  effect  of  some  other  physical  phenomenon  only,  which  is 
also  visible. 

This  tendency  to  regard  everything  upon  one  plane,  the  un- 
willingness to  recognize  anything  outside  of  that  plane,  horribly 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  145 

narrows  our  view  of  life,  prevents  our  grasping  it  in  its  entirety— 
and  taken  in  conjunction  with  the  materialistic  attempts  to  ac- 
count for  the  higher  as  a  function  of  the  lower,  appears  as  the  prin- 
cipal impediment  to  the  development  of  our  knowledge,  the  chief 
cause  of  the  dissatisfaction  with  science,  the  complaints  about  the 
bankruptcy  of  science,  and  its  actual  bankruptcy  in  many  of  its 
relations. 

The  dissatisfaction  with  science  is  perfectly  well  grounded, 
and  the  complaints  about  its  insolvency  are  entirely  just,  because 
science  has  really  entered  a  cut  de  sac  out  of  which  there  is  no 
escape,  and  the  official  recognition  of  the  fact  that  the  direction 
it  has  taken  is  entirely  the  wrong  one,  is  only  a  question  of  time. 


Let  us  take  some  simple  example  which  involves  an  interrela- 
tion between  all  three  kinds  of  phenomena  known  to  us — physical 
phenomena,  the  phenomena  of  life,  and  the  phenomena  of  con- 
sciousness—and let  us  see  how  positivistic  science  regards  them. 

Imagine  that  you  are  standing  at  a  window  and  see  a  man 
on  the  street  shooting  a  revolver  at  another  man. 

The  whole  chain  of  events  comes  evidently  from  afar,  proceed- 
ing from  a  past  unknown  to  you,  and  going  into  an  unknown 
future.  The  chain  is  quite  continuous  and  indivisible.  The 
"  shot"  is  a  link  in  this  chain. 

But  when  science  considers  the  shot,  it  takes  it  entirely  out  of 
that  chain,  a  link  of  which  constitutes  this  phenomenon,  and  con- 
structs its  own  chain  of  phenomena,  in  which,  according  to  the 
view  of  science,  the  shot  properly  belongs;  thus  it  places  these 
phenomena  in  false  relation  one  to  another,  because  it  will  include 
in  its  chain  physical  phenomena  only. 

The  "shot"  is  a  link  in  an  infinite  chain  of  phenomena.  This 
much  science  admits :  but  as  regards  the  shot,  science  considers  it  as 
something  finite,  having  a  beginning  and  an  end,  because  it  has 
neither  means  nor  methods  for  dealing  with  an  infinite  series.  It 
is  true  that  mathematics,  which  positivistic  science  places  as  the 
very  foundation  of  its  edifice,  establishes  with  the  utmost  exacti- 
tude that  infinite  magnitudes  are  subject  to  entirely  different  laws 
from  finite  ones,  and  that  it  is  impossible  to  deal  with  infinite 
magnitudes  as  with  finite  ones.  This  fact  science  cannot  deny 
in  theory,  but  in  practice,  in  its  conclusions,  science  does  not  con- 


146  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

sider  it  at  all,  but  obstinately  endeavors  to  regard  every  phe- 
nomenon as  finite.    So  it  is  also  in  this  given  case. 

What  is  the  shot  from  the  standpoint  of  science?  The  move- 
ment of  the  trigger  and  the  spring,  the  impact  of  the  hammer  upon 
the  cartridge,  the  explosion  of  gases,  the  expulsion  of  the  bullet, 
the  sound  from  the  vibrations  of  the  air,  the  flight  of  the  bullet 
and  its  encounter  with  something  in  its  path. 

That  is  all  that  is  visible  from  the  positivistic  standpoint:  but 
of  what  chain  of  phenomena  will  it  be  a  link,  if  regarded  in  this 
manner?  The  phyiscist  will  say  that  the  cause  of  the  shot  is  in 
the  explosive  force  contained  in  the  powder,  i.  е.,  its  ability  to 
transform  itself  quickly  into  a  gaseous  state,  giving  an  enormous 
amount  of  gas  in  comparison  with  the  volume  of  the  containing 
solid.  He  will  explain  why  this  happens  thus,  will  give  the  con- 
stitution of  powder,  will  tell  from  whence  and  in  what  manner  the 
energy  developed  in  the  shot  was  accumulated  into  powder.  Then 
he  will  investigate  the  primer,  and  in  conclusion  will  establish  that 
the  impulse  to  the  liberation  of  energy  developed  during  the  shot 
was  the  contraction  of  the  muscles  of  the  finger  which  pressed  the 
trigger.  The  trifling  amount  of  energy  expended  in  this  slight  mo- 
tion was  undoubtedly  drawn  from  the  world  surrounding  us,  taken 
in  with  the  food  and  air.  Possibly  at  the  pressing  of  the  trigger  by 
the  finger  that  energy  acted  which  was  contained  in  a  piece  of  meat 
eaten  the  day  before. 

Regarding  the  consequences  of  the  shot,  science  would  say  that 
the  escape  of  gases  produced  the  vibrations  in  the  air,  and  the 
force  put  into  the  shot  went  into  the  rupturing  of  the  flesh,  bones 
and  sinews  of  the  body  of  another  man. 

All  this  is  not  a  caricature,  but  a  perfectly  exact  description 
of  the  scientific  method  of  investigating  phenomena.  Science,  so 
long  as  it  remains  itself,  cannot  say  anything  more. 

But  let  us  see  how  such  an  investigation  of  the  shot  corresponds 
with  reality.  Let  us  seek  really  the  chains  of  which  the  shot  is  a 
link.  Here  we  come  to  the  recognition  of  a  highly  important  fact: 
the  shot  is  a  link  in  very  many  chains.  Positivistic  science  recog- 
nizes only  one  of  them — the  chain  of  physical  consecutiveness— 
while  in  reality  the  shot  is  the  point  of  intersection  of  many  lines, 
a  link  belonging  to  many  intercrossing  chains.  Let  us  examine  these 
chains.  First  of  all  let  us  find  out  if  we  may  regard  it  as  a  fact  that 
the  shot  is  a  link  in  many  chains,  in  many  series  of  phenomena. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  147 

The  chain  of  physical  sequence  which  science  considers  is  not  a 
causal  chain,  i.  е.,  it  is  not  the  chain  of  precedent  causes  which  led 
to  the  shot.  It  is  the  chain  of  means,  which  created  the  possi- 
bility of  the  phenomenon  of  the  shot.  This  is  the  chain  of  the  ac- 
cumulation of  physical  energy  liberated  during  the  shot.  But  this 
energy  liberated  something  else.  This  energy  liberated  the  feeling 
burning  in  the  soul  of  the  person  who  fired  the  shot  at  the  moment 
of  firing — his  desire  to  shoot,  his  determination  to  shoot.  The 
desire  and  the  determination  are  phenomena  of  consciousness. 
They  were  engendered  through  the  influence  of  many  antecedent 
circumstances.  And  the  series  of  these  antecedent  circumstances, 
into  which  entered  both  the  phenomena  of  consciousness  and 
physical  phenomena,  itself  represents  the  causal  chain  of  the  shot, 
i.  е.,  the  chain  of  causes  which  engendered  the  phenomenon  of  the 
shot,  which  liberated  all  the  latent  energies  (the  muscular  force  of 
a  finger  and  the  explosive  force  of  powder)  acting  at  the  moment 
of  the  shot.  In  that  shot  a  series  of  obscure  and  hidden  phe- 
nomena of  consciousness — the  desire  for  revenge,  rage,  hate, 
fear — found  their  expression  as  a  physical  phenomenon. 

A  stream  from  underground  burst  through  the  surface. 

Unquestionably  the  shot  is  a  link  in  many  events.  Possibly  it 
is  the  result  of  a  plot,  perhaps  it  was  provoked  by  passion  and 
jealousy,  perhaps  the  man  shot  to  defend  himself  or  another, 
perhaps  he  acted  in  obedience  to  his  sense  of  honor,  perhaps  he 
was  swayed  by  personal  emotions — in  any  case  the  "shot"  had  its 
history  in  the  past  and  will  have  an  influence  upon  the  future. 
After  it  direct  and  immediate  results  follow — the  wound  inflicted 
upon  another,  pain,  suffering,  perhaps  death;  the  sorrow  of  his 
relatives,  their  anger  against  the  assassin,  the  examination,  the 
trial.    All  these  are  chains  of  events,  one  link  of  which  is  the  shot. 

If  we  consider  the  shot  divorced  from  these  categories,  we  shall 
never  understand  what  the  shot,  as  a  phenomenon,  really  is. 

Positivistic  science,  regarding  itself  as  real  and  exact,  is  in 
truth  studying  an  entirely  artificial,  fantastic  world,  having 
nothing  in  common  with  the  real  world.  In  the  real  world  there  is 
nothing  separate,  all  is  connected.  There  is  nothing  finite,  fin- 
ished, defined.  Science  studies  the  "shot"  taking  it  as  a  concept, 
i.  е.,  taking  the  common  properties  of  all — or  nearly  all — shots. 
But  in  the  world  of  reality  the  shot  as  a  concept  does  not  exist. 
The  logical  concept  of  a  shot  is  simply  an  artificial  something 


148  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

created  for  ease  and  reasoning.  To  study  that  artificial  some- 
thing, accepting  it  as  real — this  means  to  fall  into  the  sin  of  ma- 
terialism, to  accept  the  false  for  the  real.  Actually  each  shot  is 
a  link  in  its  own  quite  special  combination  of  causal  chains.  And 
it  is  impossible  to  select  a  single  one,  the  external,  out  of  this  com- 
bination of  chains.  If  we  do  not  know  or  do  not  see  anything 
except  this  external  sequence,  we  know  only  the  phenomena  of  that 
which  has  happened  in  reality,  i.  е.,  we  know  literally  nothing. 
Two  phenomena,  seemingly  exactly  similar,  may  be  links  of  such 
different  causal  chains  that  in  reality  these  phenomena  are  not 
only  not  alike,  but  they  are  the  direct  opposites  of  one  another. 

To  positivistic  thinking,  all  shots  are  similar;  they  differ  only  in 
their  force.  But  to  truly  exact  investigation  there  are  no  similar 
shots. 

We  may  say — not  as  an  assumption,  but  as  an  affirmation — that 
the  world  of  physical  phenomena  in  itself  represents  the  section, 
as  it  were,  of  another  world,  existing  right  here,  and  the  events  of 
which  are  proceeding  right  here,  but  invisibly  for  us.  There  is 
nothing  more  miraculous  nor  supernatural  than  life.  Consider 
the  street  of  a  great  city,  in  all  its  details.  An  enormous  diversity 
of  facts  will  result.  But  how  much  is  hidden  underneath  these 
facts  of  that  which  it  is  impossible  to  see  at  all!  What  desires, 
passions,  thoughts,  greed,  covetousness ;  how  much  of  suffering 
both  petty  and  great;  how  much  of  deceit,  falsity;  how  much  of 
lying;  how  many  invisible  threads — sympathies,  antipathies, 
interests — bind  this  street  with  the  entire  world!  If  we  realize 
this  imaginatively,  then  it  will  become  clear  that  it  is  impossible 
to  study  the  street  by  that  which  is  visible  alone.  It  is  necessary 
to  plunge  into  the  depths.  The  complex  and  enormous  phe- 
nomena of  the  street  will  not  reveal  its  infinite  noumenon,  which  is 
bound  up  both  with  eternity  and  with  time,  with  the  past  and 
with  the  future,  and  with  the  entire  world.  ~s 

Therefore  we  have  a  full  right  to  regard  the  visible  phenomenal 
world  as  a  section  of  some  other  infinitely  more  complex  world, 
manifesting  itself  at  a  given  moment  in  the  first  one. 

And  this  world  of  noumena  is  infinite  and  incomprehensible 
for  us,  just  as  the  three-dimensional  world,  in  all  its  manifoldness 
of  function,  is  incomprehensible  to  the  two-dimensional  being. 
The  nearest  approach  to  "truth"  which  is  possible  for  man  is  con- 
tained in  the  saying:  everything  has  an  infinite  variety  of  meanings, 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  149 

and  to  know  them  all  is  impossible.  In  other  words,  "truth,"  as  we 
understand  it,  i.  е.,  the  finite  definition  is  possible  only  in  a  finite 
series  of  phenomena.  In  an  infinite  series  it  will  certainly  become 
its  own  opposite. 

Hegel  has  given  utterance  to  this  last  thought:  "Every  idea, 
extended  into  infinity,  becomes  its  own  opposite." 

In  this  change  of  meaning  is  contained  the  cause  of  the  incom- 
prehensibility to  man  of  the  noumenal  world.  The  noumenon  of 
a  thing,  i.  е.,  the  thing-in-itself,  contains  an  infinite  quantity  of 
meanings  and  functions  of  something  which  it  is  impossible  to 
grasp  with  our  mind.  And  in  addition  to  this  it  involves  a  change 
of  meaning  of  one  and  the  same  thing.  In  one  meaning  it  repre- 
sents an  enormous  whole,  including  within  itself  a  great  number  of 
things :  in  another  meaning  it  is  an  insignificant  part  of  a  great  whole. 
Our  mind  cannot  bind  all  this  into  one;  therefore,  the  noumenon  of 
a  thing  recedes  from  us  according  to  the  measure  of  our  knowledge, 
just  as  a  shadow  flees  before  us.    "Light  on  the  Path"  says : 

"You  will  enter  the  light,  but  you  will  never  touch  the  flame" 

This  means,  that  all  knowledge  is  relative.  We  can  never  grasp 
all  the  meanings  of  any  one  thing,  because  in  order  to  grasp  them 
all,  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  grasp  the  whole  world,  with  all  the 
variety  of  meanings  contained  in  it. 

The  principal  difference  between  the  phenomenal  and  noumenal 
aspects  of  the  world  is  contained  in  the  fact  that  the  first  one  is 
always  limited,  always  finite;  it  includes  those  properties  of  a 
given  thing  which  we  can  generally  know  as  phenomena:  the 
second,  or  noumenal  aspect,  is  always  unlimited,  always  infinite. 
And  we  can  never  say  where  the  hidden  functions  and  the  hidden 
meaning  of  a  given  thing  end.  Properly  speaking,  they  end  no- 
where. They  may  vary  infinitely,  i.  е.,  may  seem  various,  ever 
new  from  some  new  standpoint,  but  they  cannot  utterly  vanish, 
any  more  than  they  can  cease,  come  to  an  end. 

All  that  is  highest  to  which  we  shall  come  in  the  understanding 
of  the  meaning,  the  significance,  of  the  soul  of  any  phenomenon, 
will  again  have  another  meaning,  from  another,  still  higher  stand- 
point, in  still  broader  generalization — and  there  is  no  end  to  ill 
In  this  is  the  majesty  and  the  horror  of  infinity. 


Let  us  also  remember  that  the  world  as  we  know  it  does  not 
represent  anything  stable.    It  must  change   with  the  slightest 


150  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

change  in  the  forms  of  our  knowledge.  Phenomena  which  appear 
to  us  as  unrelated  can  be  seen  by  some  other  more  inclusive  con- 
sciousness as  parts  of  a  single  whole.  Phenomena  which  appear 
to  us  as  similar  may  reveal  themselves  as  entirely  different.  Phe- 
nomena which  appear  to  us  as  complete  and  indivisible,  may  be 
in  reality  exceedingly  complex,  may  include  within  themselves 
different  elements,  having  nothing  in  common.  And  all  these 
together  may  be  one  whole  in  a  category  quite  incomprehensible 
to  us.  Therefore,  beyond  our  view  of  things  another  view  is 
possible — a  view,  as  it  were,  from  another  world,  from  "over 
there,"  from  "the  other  side." 

Now  "over  there"  does  not  mean  some  other  place,  but  a  new 
method  of  knowledge,  a  new  consciousness.  And  should  we  regard 
phenomena,  not  as  isolated,  but  bound  together  with  inter-cross- 
ing chains  of  things  and  events,  we  would  begin  to  regard  them 
not  from  over  here,  but  from  over  there. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

categories  of  space  and  time,     lhe  reality  01  пмцу        в 
^wTTeetd  what  we do  not  see.  " Plato's  oiaiogue  about  the 


cavern. 


T  seems  to  us  that  we  see  something  and  understand  some- 
thk£  But  in  reality  all  that  proceeds  around  us  we  sense 
only  very  confusedly,  just  as  a  snail  senses  confusedly  the 
sunlight,  the  darkness,  and  the  rain.        „..,.- 

Sometimes  in  things  we  sense  confusedly  their  difference 
in  function,  i.  е.,  their  real  difference.  . 

On  one  occasion  I  was  crossing  the  Neva  with  one  о  my  friends, 
A  ^th  whom  I  happened  to  havehad  many  conversations  upon  the 
fhemes  touched  on  in  this   book.     We  had   been   talking,   but 

and  making  probably  the  same  reflection:      ******  ?V£ 
factory  chimneys!"  said  A.    Behind  the  walls  of  the  fortress 
ndeed  appeared  some  brick  chimneys  blackened  by  smoke. 

On  his  saying  this,  I  too  sensed  the  difference  between  the 
chimneys  and  the  prison  walls  with  unusual  clearness  and  like  an 
SI     I  realized  *  difference  between  the .  ^  bno 
themselves,  and  it  seemed  to  me  that  A  realized  this  diflerence 

^tater  in  conversation  with  A,  I  recalled  this  episode  and  he 
told  me  that  „ot  only  then,  but  always,  he  sensed  these  differences 
and  ^deeply  convinced  of  their  reality.  "*£%"£% 
itself  that  a  stone  is  a  stone  and  nothing  more,  he  said,  but  any 
simple  woman  or  child  knows  perfectly  that  a  stone  from  the  wall 
of  a  church  and  from  a  prison  wall  are  different  things. 


152  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

It  seems  to  me  also,  that  in  considering  a  given  phenomenon  in 
connection  with  all  the  chains  of  sequences  of  which  it  is  a  link, 
we  shall  see  that  the  subjective  sensation  of  the  difference  between 
two  physically  similar  objects — which  we  are  accustomed  to  think 
of  only  as  poetic  expression,  metaphor,  and  the  reality  of  which 
we  deny — is  entirely  real;  we  shall  see  that  these  objects  are  really 
different,  just  as  different  as  the  candle  and  the  coin  which  appear 
as  similar  circles  (moving  lines)  in  the  two-dimensional  world  of 
the  plane-man.  We  shall  see  that  things  of  the  same  material 
constitution  but  different  in  their  functions  are  really  different, 
and  that  this  difference  goes  so  deep  as  to  make  different  the  very 
material  which  is  physically  the  same.  There  are  differences  in 
stone,  in  wood,  in  iron,  in  paper,  which  no  chemistry  will  ever 
detect :  but  these  differences  exist,  and  there  are  men  who  feel  and 
understand  them. 

The  mast  of  a  ship,  a  gallows,  a  crucifix  at  a  cross-roads  on  the 
steppes, — these  may  be  made  of  the  same  kind  of  wood,  but  in 
reality  they  are  different  objects  made  of  different  material.  That 
which  we  see,  touch,  investigate  is  nothing  more  than  "the  circles 
on  the  plane"  made  by  the  coin  and  the  candle.  They  are  only 
the  shadows  of  real  things,  the  substance  of  which  is  contained  in 
their  function.  The  shadow  of  a  sailor,  of  a  hangman,  and  of  an 
ascetic  may  be  quite  similar — it  is  impossible  to  distinguish  them 
by  their  shadows,  just  as  it  is  impossible  to  find  any  difference  be- 
tween the  wood  of  a  mast,  of  a  gallows  and  of  a  cross  by  chemical 
analysis.  But  they  are  different  men  and  different  objects — their 
shadows  only  are  equal  and  similar. 

And  if  we  take  men  as  we  know  them — the  sailor,  the  hang- 
man, the  ascetic:  men  who  seem  to  us  similar  and  equal — and 
consider  them  from  the  standpoint  of  their  differences  in  function, 
we  shall  see  that  in  reality  they  are  entirely  different  and  that 
there  is  nothing  in  common  between  them.  They  are  quite 
different  beings,  belonging  to  different  categories,  to  different 
planes  of  the  world  between  which  there  are  no  bridges,  no 
avenues  at  all.  These  men  seem  to  us  equal  and  similar  because 
in  most  cases  we  see  only  the  shadows  of  real  facts.  The  "souls" 
of  these  men  are  actually  quite  different,  different  not  only  in  their 
quality,  their  magnitude,  their"age,"as  some  people  like  now  to  put 
it,  but  as  different  in  the  very  nature,  origin  and  purpose  of  their  exis- 
tence as  things  belonging  to  entirely  different  categories  can  be. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  153 

When  we  shall  begin  to  understand  this,  the  general  concept 
man  will  take  on  a  different  meaning. 

And  this  relation  holds  in  the  observation  of  all  phenomena. 
The  mast,  the  gallows,  the  cross-these  are  things  belonging  to 
such  different  categories,  the  atoms  of  such  different  objects 
(known  only  by  their  functions),  that  there  cannot  be s  a  question 
of  any  similarity  at  all.    Our  misfortune  consists  in  the  fact  that 
we  regard  the  chemical  constitution  of  a  thing  as  its  most  real 
attribute,  while  as  a  matter  of  fact  its  true  attributes  must  be 
sought  for  in  its  functions.     Could  we  broaden  and  deepen  our 
vision  of  the  chains  of  causation  the  links  of  which  are  forged  by 
our  action  and  our  conduct;  could  we  learn  to  see  them  not  only 
in  their  narrow  relation  to  the  life  of  man-to  our  personal  life- 
hut  in  their  broad  cosmical  meaning;  should  we  succeed  m  finding 
and  establishing  a  connection  between  the  simple  phenomena  ot 
our  life  and  the  life  of  the  cosmos;  then  without  doubt  in  these 
"simplest"  phenomena  would  be  unveiled  for  us  an  infinity  ot  the 
new  and  the  unexpected. 

For  example,  in  this  way  we  may  come  to  know  something 
entirely  new  about  those  simple  physical  phenomena  which  we  are 
accustomed  to  regard  as  natural  and  obvious  and  about  which  we 
think  we  know  something.     Then,  unexpectedly,  we  may  find 
that  we  know  nothing,  that  everything  heretofore  known  about 
them  is  only  an  incorrect  deduction  from  incorrect  premises. 
There  may  be  revealed  to  us  something  infinitely  great  and  im- 
measurably important  in  such  phenomena  as  the  expansion  and 
contraction  of  solids,  electrical  phenomena,  heat,  light,  sound, 
the  movements  of  the  planets,  the  coming  of  day  and  ot  night,  the 
change  of   seasons,    a   thunderstorm,    heat-lightnmg,   etc.,   etc 
Generally  speaking,  we  may  find  explained  in  the  most  unexpected 
manner  the  properties  of  phenomena  which  we  used  to  accept  as 
given  things,  as  not  containing  anything  within  themselves  that 
we  could  not  see  and  understand.  m 

The  constancy,  the  time,  the  periodicity  or  unpenodicity  ot 
phenomena  may  take  on  quite  a  new  meaning  and  significance 
for  us.  The  new  and  the  unexpected  may  reveal  itseli  in  the 
transition  of  some  phenomena  into  others.  Birth,  death,  the  lite 
of  a  man,  his  relations  with  other  men;  love,  enmity,  sympathies, 
antipathies,  desires,  passions— these  may  unexpectedly  receive 
illumination  by  an  entirely  new  fight.     It  is  impossible  now  to 


154  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

imagine  the  nature  of  this  newness  which  we  shall  sense  in  familiar 
things,  and  once  felt  it  will  be  difficult  to  understand. 

But  it  is  really  only  our  inaptitude  to  feel  and  understand  this 
"newness"  which  divides  us  from  it,  because  we  are  living  in  it 
and  amidst  it.  Our  senses,  however,  are  too  primitive,  our  con- 
cepts are  too  crude,  for  that  fine  differentiation  of  phenomena 
which  must  unfold  itself  to  us  in  higher  space.  Our  minds,  our 
powers  of  correlation  and  association  are  insufficiently  elastic  for 
the  grasping  of  new  relations.  Therefore,  the  first  emotion  at  the 
rising  of  the  curtain  on  "that  world" — i.  е.,  this  our  world,  but 
free  of  those  limitations  under  which  we  usually  regard  it — must 
be  of  wonderment,  and  this  wonderment  must  grow  greater  and 
greater  according  to  our  better  acquaintance  with  it.  And  the 
better  we  know  a  certain  thing  or  a  certain  relation  of  things — the 
nearer,  the  more  familiar  they  are  to  us — the  greater  will  be  our 
wonder  at  the  new  and  the  unexpected  therein  revealed. 

Desiring  to  understand  the  noumenal  world  we  must  search  for 
the  hidden  meaning  in  everything.  At  present  we  are  too  heavily 
enchained  by  the  habit  of  the  positivistic  method  of  searching 
always  for  the  visible  cause  and  the  visible  effect.  Under  this  weight 
of  positivistic  habit  it  is  extremely  difficult  for  us  to  comprehend 
certain  ideas.  Among  other  things  we  have  difficulty  in  under- 
standing the  reality  of  the  difference  in  the  noumenal  world  between 
objects  of  our  world  which  are  similar,  but  different  in  function. 

But  if  we  desire  to  approach  to  an  understanding  of  the  nou- 
menal world,  we  must  try  with  all  our  might  to  notice  all  those 
seeming,  "subjective"  differences  between  objects  which  astonish 
us  sometimes,  of  which  we  are  often  painfully  aware — those 
differences  which  are  expressed  in  artistic  metaphors  which  are 
often  revelations  of  the  world  of  reality.  Such  differences  are  the 
realities  of  the  noumenal  world,  far  more  real  than  all  maya 
(illusion)  of  our  phenomena. 

We  should  endeavor  to  notice  these  realities  and  to  develop 
within  ourselves  the  ability  to  feel  them,  because  exactly  in  this 
manner  and  only  by  such  a  method  do  we  put  ourselves  in  contact 
with  the  noumenal  world  or  the  world  of  causes. 


I  find  an  interesting  example  of  the  understanding  of  the  hidden 
meaning  of  phenomena  contained  in  "The  Occult  World"  in  the 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  155 

letter  of  a  Hindu  occultist  to  the  author  of  the  book,  A.  P. 

Sinnett. 

We  see  a  vast  difference  [he  writes]  between  the  two  qualities  of  two 
equal  amounts  of  energy  expended  by  two  men,  of  whom  one,  let  us 
suppose,  is  on  his  way  to  his  daily  quiet  work,  and  another  on  his  way  to 
denounce  a  fellow  creature  at  the  police  station,  while  the  men  of  science 
see  none;  and  we— not  they—  see  a  specific  difference  between  the 
energy  in  the  motion  of  the  wind  and  that  of  a  revolving  wheel. 

Every  thought  of  man  upon  being  evolved  passes  into  the  inner  world, 
and  becomes  an  active  entity  by  associating  itself,  coalescing  we  might 
term  it,  with  an  elemental— that  is  to  say,  with  one  of  the  semi-intelh- 
gent  forces  of  the  kingdom. 

If  we  ignore  the  last  part  of  this  quotation  for  the  moment,  and 
consider  only  the  first  part,  we  shall  easily  see  that  the  "man  of 
science"  does  not  recognize  the  difference  in  the  quality  of  the 
energy  spent  by  two  men  going,  one  to  his  work,  and  another  to 
denounce  someone.  For  the  man  of  science  this  difference  is 
negligible:  science  does  not  sense  it  and  does  not  recognize  it. 
But  perhaps  the  difference  is  much  deeper  and  consists  not  in  the 
difference  between  modes  of  energy  but  in  the  difference  between 
men,  one  of  whom  is  able  to  develop  energy  of  one  sort  and  an- 
other that  of  a  different  sort.  Now  we  have  a  form  of  knowledge 
which  senses  this  difference  perfectly,  knows  and  understands 
it.  I  am  speaking  of  art.  The  musician,  the  painter,  the  sculptor 
well  understand  that  it  is  possible  to  walk  differently— and  even 
impossible  not  to  walk  differently:  a  workman  and  a  spy  can- 
not walk  like  one  another. 

Better  than  all  the  actor  understands  this,  or  at  least  he  should 
understand  it  better. 

The  poet  understands  that  the  mast  of  a  ship,  the  gallows,  and 
the  cross  are  made  of  different  wood.  He  understands  the  differ- 
ence between  the  stone  from  a  church  wall  and  the  stone  from  a 
prison  wall.  He  hears  "the  voices  of  stones,"  understands  the 
whisperings  of  ancient  walls,  of  tumuli,  of  mountains,  rivers, 
woods  and  plains.  He  hears  "the  voice  of  the  silence,"  understands 
the  psychological  difference  of  silence,  knows  that  one  silence  can 
differ  from  another.  And  this  poetical  understanding  of  the  world 
should  be  developed,  strengthened  and  fortified,  because  only  by  its 
aid  do  we  come  in  contact  with  the  true  world  of  reality.  In  the 
real  world,  behind  phenomena  which  appear  to  us  similar,  often 


156  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

stand  noumena  so  different  that  only  by  our  blindness  is  it  possible 
to  account  for  our  idea  of  the  similarity  of  those  phemomena. 

Through  such  a  false  idea  the  current  belief  in  the  similarity 
and  equality  of  men  must  have  arisen.  In  reality  the  difference 
between  a  "hangman,"  a  "sailor,"  and  an  "ascetic"  is  not  an 
accidental  difference  of  position,  state  and  heredity,  as  material- 
ism tries  to  assure  us;  nor  is  it  a  difference  between  the  stages  of 
one  and  the  same  evolution,  as  theosophy  affirms ;  but  it  is  a  deep 
and  impassable  difference — such  as  exists  between  murder,  work 
and  prayer — involving  entirely  different  worlds.  The  represent- 
atives of  these  worlds  may  seem  to  us  to  be  similar  men,  only 
because  we  see  not  them,  but  their  shadows  only. 

It  is  necessary  to  accustom  oneself  to  the  thought  that  this 
difference  is  not  metaphysical  but  entirely  real,  more  real  than 
many  visible  differences  between  things  and  between  phenomena. 

All  art,  in  essence,  consists  of  the  understanding  and  repre- 
sentation of  these  elusive  differences.  The  phenomenal  world  is 
merely  a  means  for  the  artist — just  as  colors  are  for  the  painter, 
and  sounds  for  the  musician — a  means  for  the  understanding 
of  the  noumenal  world  and  for  the  expression  of  that  understand- 
ing. At  the  present  stage  of  our  development  we  possess  nothing 
so  powerful,  as  an  instrument  of  knowledge  of  the  world  of  causes, 
as  art.  The  mystery  of  life  dwells  in  the  fact  that  the  noumenon, 
i.  е.,  the  hidden  meaning  and  the  hidden  function  of  a  thing,  is  re- 
flected in  its  phenomenon.  A  phenomenon  is  merely  the  reflection 
of  a  noumenon  in  our  sphere.  The  phenomenon  is  the  image 
of  the  noumenon.  It  is  possible  to  know  the  noumenon  by  the 
phenomenon.  But  in  this  field  the  chemical  reagents  and  spectro- 
scopes can  acccomplish  nothing.  Only  that  fine  apparatus  which 
is  called  the  soul  of  an  artist  can  understand  and  feel  the  reflection 
of  the  noumenon  in  the  phenomenon.  In  art  it  is  necessary  to 
study  "occultism" — the  hidden  side  of  life.  The  artist  must  be  a 
clairvoyant;  he  must  see  that  which  others  do  not  see:  he  must  be 
a  magician,  must  possess  the  power  to  make  others  see  that  which 
they  do  not  themselves  see,  but  which  he  does  see. 

Art  sees  more  and  farther  than  we  do.  As  was  said  before  we 
usually  see  nothing,  we  merely  feel  our  way;  therefore  we  do  not 
notice  those  differences  between  things  which  cannot  be  expressed 
in  terms  of  chemistry  or  physics.  But  art  is  the  beginning  of  vision; 
it  sees  vastly  more  than  the  most  perfect  apparatus  can  discover; 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  157 

and  it  senses  the  infinite  invisible  facets  of  that  crystal,  one  facet 
of  which  we  call  man. 

The  truth  is  that  this  earth  is  the  scene  of  a  drama  of  which  we  only 
perceive  scattered  portions,  and  in  which  the  greater  number  of  the 
actors  are  invisible  to  us. 

Thus  says  the  theosophical  writer,  Mabel  Collins,  the  author  of 
"Light  on  the  Path,"  in  a  little  book,  "Illusions."  And  this  is  very 
true;  we  see  only  a  little. 

But  art  sees  farther  than  merely  human  sight,  and  therefore 
concerning  certain  sides  of  life  art  alone  can  speak,  and  has  the 
right  to  speak.  

A  remarkable  attempt  to  portray  our  relation  to  the  "noumenal 
world"— to  that  "great  life"— is  found  in  Book  VII  of  Plato's 
Republic* 

Behold!  human  beings  living  in  a  sort  of  underground  den;  they  have 
been  there  from  their  childhood,  and  have  their  legs  and  necks  chained— 
the  chains  are  arranged  in  such  a  manner  as  to  prevent  them  from 
turning  round  their  heads.  At  a  distance  above  and  behind  them 
the  light  of  a  fire  is  blazing,  and  between  the  fire  and  the  prisoners  there 
is  a  raised  way;  and  you  will  see,  if  you  look,  a  low  wall  built  along  the 
way,  like  the  screen  which  marionette  players  have  before  them,  over 
which  they  show  the  puppets.  Imagine  men  passing  along  the  wall 
carrying  vessels,  which  appear  over  the  wall;  also  figures  of  men  and 
animals,  made  of  wood  and  stone  and  various  materials;  and  some  of  the 
passengers,  as  you  would  expect,  are  talking,  and  some  of  them  are 
silent ! 

That  is  a  strange  image,  he  said,  and  they  are  strange  prisoners. 
Like  ourselves,  I  replied;  and  they  see  only  their  own  shadows,  or 
the  shadows  of  one  another,  which  the  fire  throws  on  the  opposite  wall 
of  the  cave?  , 

True,  he  said;  how  could  they  see  anything  but  the  shadows  it  they 
were  never  allowed  to  move  their  heads? 

And  of  the  objects  which  are  being  carried  in  like  manner  they  would 
only  see  the  shadows? 
Yes  he  said. 

And  if  they  were  able  to  talk  with  one  another,  would  they  not  sup- 
pose that  they  were  naming  what  was  actually  before  them? 
Very  true. 

And  suppose  further  that  the  prison  had  an  echo  which  came  trom 
the  other  side,  would  they  not  be  sure  to  fancy  that  the  voice  which  they 
heard  was  that  of  a  passing  shadow? 
No  question,  he  replied. 

"*"The  Dialogues  of  Plato,"  Transl.  by  B.  Jowett,  Vol.  II,  pp.  341-345,   Chas.  Scribner's   Sona, 


N.  Y.     1911. 


158  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

There  can  be  no  question,  I  said  that  the  truth  would  be  to  them  just 
nothing  but  the  shadows  of  the  images. 

That  is  certain. 

And  now  look  again  and  see  how  they  are  released  and  cured  of  their 
folly.  At  first,  when  any  one  of  them  is  liberated  and  compelled  sud- 
denly to  go  up  and  turn  his  neck  round  and  walk  and  look  at  the  light, 
he  will  suffer  sharp  pains;  the  glare  will  distress  him  and  he  will  be  un- 
able to  see  the  realities  of  which  in  his  former  state  he  had  seen  the  shadows; 
and  then  imagine  someone  saying  to  him,  that  what  he  saw  before  was 
an  illusion,  but  that  now  he  is  approaching  real  being  and  has  a  truer 
sight  and  vision  of  more  real  things, — what  will  be  his  reply?  And 
you  may  further  imagine  that  his  instructor  is  pointing  to  the  objects  as 
they  pass  and  requiring  him  to  name  them, — will  he  not  be  in  a  diffi- 
culty? Will  he  not  fancy  that  the  shadows  which  he  formerly  saw  are 
truer  than  the  objects  which  are  now  shown  to  him? 

Far  truer. 

And  if  he  is  compelled  to  look  at  the  light,  will  he  not  have  a  pain  in 
his  eyes  which  will  make  him  turn  away  to  take  refuge  in  the  object  of 
vision  which  he  can  see,  and  which  he  will  conceive  to  be  clearer  than  the 
things  which  are  now  being  shown  to  him? 

True,  he  said. 

And  suppose  once  more,  that  he  is  reluctantly  dragged  up  a  steep  and 
rugged  ascent,  and  held  fast  and  forced  into  the  presence  of  the  sun  him- 
self, do  you  not  think  that  he  will  be  pained  and  irritated,  and  when  he 
approaches  the  light  he  will  have  his  eyes  dazzled,  and  will  not  be  able  to 
see  any  of  the  realities  which  are  now  affirmed  to  be  the  truth? 

Not  all  in  a  moment,  he  said. 

He  will  require  to  get  accustomed  to  the  sight  of  the  upper  world. 
And  first  he  will  see  the  shadows  best,  next  the  reflections  of  men  and 
other  objects  in  the  water,  and  then  the  objects  themselves;  next  he  will 
gaze  upon  the  light  of  the  moon  and  the  stars;  and  he  will  see  the  sky 
and  the  stars  by  night,  better  than  the  sun,  or  the  light  of  the  sun,  by 
day? 

Certainly. 

And  at  last  he  will  be  able  to  see  the  sun,  and  not  mere  reflections  of  him 
in  the  water,  but  he  will  see  him  as  he  is  in  his  own  proper  place,  and  not 
in  another,  and  he  will  contemplate  his  nature. 

Certainly. 

And  after  this  he  will  reason  that  the  sun  is  he  who  gives  the  seasons 
and  the  years,  and  is  the  guardian  of  all  that  is  in  the  visible  world,  and 
in  a  certain  way  the  cause  of  all  things  which  he  and  his  fellows  have  been 
accustomed  to  behold? 

Clearly,  he  said,  he  would  come  to  the  other  first  and  to  this  after- 
wards. 

And  when  he  remembered  his  old  habitation,  and  the  wisdom  of  the 
den  and  his  fellow-prisoners,  do  you  not  suppose  that  he  would  felicitate 
himself  on  the  change,  and  pity  them? 

Certainly,  he  would. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  159 

And  if  they  were  in  the  habit  of  conferring  honors  on  those  who  were 
quickest  to  observe  and  remember  and  foretell  which  of  the  shadows 
went  before,  and  which  followed  after,  and  which  were  together,  do  you 
think  that  he  would  care  for  such  honors  and  glories,  or  envy  the  pos- 
sessors of  them? 

Would  he  not  say  with  Homer, — 

"Better  to  be  a  poor  man,  and  have  a  poor  master," 
and  endure  anything,  than  to  think  and  live  after  their  manner? 

Yes,  he  said,  I  think  that  he  would  rather  suffer  anything  than  live 
after  their  manner. 

Imagine  once  more,  I  said,  that  such  an  one  coming  suddenly  out  of 
the  sun  were  to  be  replaced  in  his  old  situation,  is  he  not  certain  to  have 
his  eyes  full  of  darkness? 

Very  true,  he  said. 

And  if  there  were  a  contest,  and  he  had  to  compete  in  measuring  the 
shadows  with  the  prisoners  who  have  never  moved  out  of  the  den, 
during  the  time  that  his  sight  is  weak,  and  before  his  eyes  are  steady 
(and  the  time  which  would  be  needed  to  acquire  this  new  habit  of  sight 
might  be  very  considerable),  would  he  not  be  ridiculous?  Men  would 
say  of  him  that  up  he  went  and  down  he  comes  without  his  eyes;  and 
that  there  was  no  use  in  even  thinking  of  ascending :  and  if  anyone  tried 
to  loose  another  and  lead  him  up  to  the  light,  let  them  only  catch  the 
offender  in  the  act,  and  they  would  put  him  to  death. 

No  question,  he  said. 

This  allegory,  I  said,  you  may  now  append  to  the  previous  argument; 
the  prison  is  the  world  of  sight,  the  light  of  the  fire  is  the  sun,  the  ascent 
and  vision  of  the  things  above  you  may  truly  regard  as  the  upward 
progress  of  the  soul  into  the  intellectual  world. 

And  you  will  understand  that  those  who  attain  to  this  beatific  vision 
are  unwilling  to  descend  to  human  affairs;  but  their  souls  are  ever 
hastening  into  the  upper  world  in  which  they  desire  to  dwell.  And  is 
there  anything  surprising  in  one  who  passes  from  divine  contemplations 
to  human  things,  misbehaving  himself  in  a  ridiculous  manner. 

There  is  nothing  surprising  in  that,  he  replied. 

Any  one  who  has  common  sense  will  remember  that  the  bewilderments 
of  the  eyes  are  of  two  kinds,  and  arise  from  two  causes,  either  from  com- 
ing out  of  the  light  or  from  going  into  the  light,  which  is  true  of  the 
mind's  eye,  quite  as  much  as  of  the  bodily  eye;  and  he  who  remembers 
this  when  he  sees  the  soul  of  any  one  whose  vision  is  perplexed  and  weak, 
will  not  be  too  ready  to  laugh;  he  will  first  ask  whether  that  soul  has 
come  out  of  the  brighter  life,  and  is  unable  to  see  because  unaccustomed 
to  the  dark,  or  having  turned  from  darkness  to  the  day  is  dazzled  by 
excess  of  light.  And  then  he  will  count  one  happy  in  his  condition  and 
state  of  being. 


CHAPTER  XV 

Occultism  and  love.  Love  and  death.  Our  different  relations  to  the 
problems  of  death  and  to  the  problems  of  love.  What  is  lacking 
in  our  understanding  of  love?  Love  as  an  every-day  and  merely 
psychological  phenomenon.  The  possibility  of  a  spiritual  under- 
standing of  love.  The  creative  force  of  love.  The  negation  of  love. 
Materialism  and  asceticism.  The  flight  from  love.  Love  and  mys- 
ticism. The  "wondrous"  in  love.  Prof.  Lutoslawsky,  Leo  Tolstoy, 
Nietzsche  and  Edward  Carpenter  on  love.    "The  Ocean  of  Sex." 

HERE  is  not  a  single  side  of  life  which  is  not  capable 
of  revealing  to  us  an  infinity  of  the  new  and  the  unex- 
pected, if  we  approach  it  with  the  knowledge  that  it  is 
not  exhausted  by  its  visibility,  that  beyond  this  visi- 
bility there  is  a  whole  "invisible  world" — a  world  of  to 
us  new  and  incomprehensible  forces  and  relations.  The  knowledge 
of  the  existence  of  this  invisible  world:  this  is  the  first  key  to  it. 
A  wealth  of  "newness"  unfolds  to  us  in  the  most  mysterious 
sides  of  our  existence,  in  those  sides  through  which  we  come  into 
direct  contact  with  eternity — in  love  and  in  death.  In  Hindu 
mythology  love  and  death  are  the  two  faces  of  one  deity.  Siva, 
god  of  the  creative  force  of  nature,  who  is  worshipped  in  his  symbol 
of  the  lingam,  is  at  the  same  time  the  god  of  violent  death,  of 
murder  and  destruction.  His  wife  is  Parvati,  goddess  of  beauty, 
love  and  happiness,  and  she  is  also  Kali  or  Durga— goddess  of  evil, 
of  misfortune,  of  sickness  and  of  death.  Together  Siva  and  Kali 
are  the  gods  of  wisdom,  the  gods  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and 

evil. 

In  the  beginning  of  his  book,  "  The  Drama  of  Love  and  Death"* 
Edward  Carpenter  very  well  defines  our  relation  to  these  deeply 
incomprehensible  and  enigmatical  sides  of  existence: 

Love  and  Death  move  through  this  world  of  ours  like  things  apart — 
underrunning  it  truly,  and  everywhere  present,  yet  seeming  to  belong 
to  some  other  mode  of  existence. 

*Mitohell  Kennerly,  1912,  New  York  and  London. 

161 


162  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

And  further: 

These  figures,  Love  and  Death,  move  through  the  world  like  closest 
friends  indeed,  never  far  separate,  and  together  dominating  it  in  a  kind 
of  triumphant  superiority;  and  yet  like  bitterest  enemies,  dogging  each 
other's  footsteps,  undoing  each  other's  work,  fighting  for  the  bodies 
and  souls  of  mankind. 

In  these  few  words  is  shown  the  contents  of  the  enigma  which 
confronts  us,  encompasses  us,  creates  and  annihilates  us.  But 
man's  relation  to  the  two  aspects  of  this  enigma  is  not  identical. 
Strange  as  it  may  seem,  the  face  of  death  has  ever  been  more  at- 
tractive to  the  mystical  imagination  of  men  than  the  face  of  love. 
There  have  always  been  many  attempts  to  understand  and  define 
the  hidden  meaning  of  death;  all  religions,  all  religious  doctrines 
begin  with  giving  to  man  this  or  that  idea  about  death.  It  is 
impossible  to  construct  any  system  of  world-contemplation  with- 
out some  definition  of  death,  and  there  are  numerous  systems 
such  as  contemporary  spiritism  which  consist  almost  entirely  of 
"views  upon  death,"  of  doctrines  about  death  and  post-mortem 
existence.  (In  one  of  his  articles,  V.  V.  Rosanoff*  observes  that 
all  religions  consist  in  substance  of  teachings  about  death.) 

But  the  problem  of  love,  in  the  contemporary  way  of  looking  at 
the  world,  is  regarded  as  something  given,  as  something  already 
understood  and  known.  Different  systems  contribute  little  that  is 
enlightening  to  an  understanding  of  love.  So  although  in  reality 
love  is  for  us  the  same  enigma  as  is  death,  yet  for  some  strange 
reason  we  think  about  it  less.  We  seem  to  have  developed  cer- 
tain cut  and  dried  standards  in  regard  to  an  understanding  of  love, 
and  men  thoughtlessly  accept  this  or  that  standard.  Art, 
which  from  its  very  nature  should  have  much  to  say  on  this  sub- 
ject, gives  a  great  deal  of  attention  to  love;  love  ever  has  been, 
and  perhaps  still  is,  the  principal  theme  of  art.  But  even  art 
chiefly  confines  itself  merely  to  descriptions  and  to  the  psycholog- 
ical analysis  of  love,  seldom  touching  those  infinite  and  eternal 
depths  which  love  contains  for  man. 

If,  for  convenience  in  reasoning,  we  shall  accept  the  division  of 
man  and  of  the  world  into  three  planes:  material,  psychic  and 
spiritual,  then  we  may  say  that  all  the  current  understandings  of 
love  are  confined  to  the  material  plane;  art  deals  with  love  on  the 
material  and  psychic  planes,  while  only  as  a  rare  exception  do 

•  A  Russian  journalist  and  author.     Transl. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  163 

philosophy  and  art  rise  to  the  spiritual  plane  in  the  understanding 
of  love.  It  is  commonly  assumed  that  love  does  not  reach  the  spir- 
itual plane,  and  even  hinders  the  spiritual  evolution — it  is  regarded 
as  an  obstacle  standing  between  man  and  his  spiritual  evolution. 

From  this  point  of  view  the  denial  of  love,  and  its  repression, 
which  is  regarded  as  the  overcoming  of  the  flesh,  conduces  to 
spiritual  development. 

Humanity  has  had  far  other  understandings  of  love,  but  for  the 
most  part  they  are  lost  and  forgotten,  and  contemporary  thought 
of  the  most  diverse  shades  does  not  comprehend,  except  by  flashes, 
the  most  important  aspect  of  love — its  mystical  and  religious  con- 
tent. The  chief  cause  of  this  condition  of  things  lies  in  the  fact 
that  the  two  great  religions  which  embrace  the  majority  of  human- 
kind— Christianity  and  Buddhism — deal  with  love  negatively,  as 
a  deplorable  necessity  of  physical  existence,  and  as  a  phenomenon 
of  a  lower  order  in  comparison  with  spiritual  aspirations,  with 
which  it  is  assumed  to  interfere.  This  view,  millenniums  old, 
has  inevitably  affected  the  most  various  modes  of  world-contem- 
plation. Moreover,  during  the  last  few  centuries,  a  growing 
materialism  has  cheapened  love  in  men's  minds  even  more, 
degrading  it  to  a  material  fact  with  material  consequences, 
which  fact  is  on  a  level  with  other  physiological  functions  of  the 
organism.  As  a  result  of  such  a  direction  of  thought,  of  such  a 
warped  point  of  view,  contemporary  humanity  has  almost  entirely 
lost  the  spiritual  understanding  of  love. 

So  that  in  our  time  men  understand  love  as  a  common,  every-day 
manner  of  life,  they  understand  it  as  a  psychological  phenomenon, 
but  all  idea  and  sense  of  the  cosmical  content  of  love  is  atrophied 
in  them. 

In  the  first  mentioned  case — in  an  every-day  understanding  of 
love — men  strive  to  utilize  love  as  an  instrument  or  means  for  the 
settling  of  their  lives;  and  in  the  second,  they  demand  of  love  that 
it  shall  settle  the  affairs  of  their  souls.  But  in  both  cases  love  is 
burdened  by  purposes  and  problems  which  do  not  belong  to  it  at 
all.  In  reality  love  is  a  cosmic  phenomenon,  in  which  men,  human- 
ity, are  merely  accidents :  a  cosmic  phenomenon  which  has  nothing 
to  do  with  either  the  lives  or  the  souls  of  men,  any  more  than  that 
the  sun  is  shining,  that  by  its  light  men  may  go  about  their 
little  affairs,  and  that  they  may  utilize  it  for  their  own  purposes. 
If  men  would  only  understand   this,   even  with  a  part  of  their 


164  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

consciousness,  a  new  world  would  open,  and  to  look  on  life  from 
all  our  usual  angles  would  become  very  strange. 

For  then  they  would  understand  that  love  is  something  else, 
and  of  quite  a  different  order  from  the  petty  phenomena  of 
earthly  life. 

Perhaps  love  is  a  world  of  strange  spirits  who  at  times  take  up 
their  abode  in  men,  subduing  them  to  themselves,  making  them 
tools  for  the  accomplishment  of  their  inscrutable  purposes.  Per- 
haps it  is  some  particular  region  of  the  inner  world  wherein  the 
souls  of  men  sometimes  enter,  and  where  they  live  according  to 
the  laws  of  that  world,  while  their  bodies  remain  on  earth,  bound 
by  the  laws  of  earth.  Perhaps  it  is  an  alchemical  work  of  some 
Great  Master  wherein  the  souls  and  bodies  of  men  play  the  role  of 
elements  out  of  which  is  compounded  a  'philosopher  s  stone,  or  an 
elixir  of  life,  or  some  mysterious  magnetic  force  necessary  to  some- 
one for  some  incomprehensible  purpose. 

It  is  difficult  to  understand  all  this,  and  to  make  it  seem  rational. 
But  by  seeking  to  understand  these  mysterious  purposes  and  by 
departing  from  mundane  interpretations,  man,  without  even  being 
conscious  of  it  at  first,  unites  himself  with  the  higher  purposes  and 
finds  that  thread  which  in  the  end  of  all  ends  will  lead  him  out  of 
the  labyrinth  of  earthly  contradictions. 

But  this  thread  must  be  found  first  through  the  emotions,  by 
direct  feeling,  and  only  afterwards  by  reason.  And  this  thread 
will  never  reveal  itself  to  a  man  who  denies  love  and  scorns  it, 
because  the  denial  of  the  importance  and  deep  meaning  of  love 
always  results  from  the  materialistic  view,  and  the  materialistic 
view  of  love  cannot  be  true.  This  view  cannot  be  true  because  it 
considers  love  too  narrowly,  deduces  general  conclusions  from 
premises  of  too  negligible  a  percentage  of  data  based  on  facts,  sees 
only  in  a  plane  section  a  phenomenon  of  four-dimensional  char- 
acter. Love  is  exactly  as  material  a  phenomenon  as  is  the  picture 
of  a  painter  or  the  symphony  of  a  musician.  To  analyze  and 
evaluate  love  materialistically  is  precisely  the  same  thing  as  try- 
ing to  value  a  picture  by  its  weight  and  a  symphony  by  the  volume 
of  sound  produced. 

What  does  the  spiritual  understanding  of  love  mean? 

It  means  the  understanding  of  the  fact  that  love  does  not  serve 
life,  but  serves  the  higher  apprehension.  If  he  is  in  right  relation 
to  it,  love  attunes  man  to  the  note  of  the  "wondrous"  strips  off 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  165 

veils,  opens  closed  doors.  Both  in  the  past,  and  perhaps  in  the 
present,  there  undoubtedly  have  been  attempts  at  the  understand- 
ing of  love  divorced  from  life,  as  a  cult,  as  a  magical  ceremony, 
attuning  body  and  soul  to  the  reception  of  the  wondrous. 

Love  in  relation  to  our  life  is  a  deity,  sometimes  terrible,  some- 
times benevolent,  but  never  subservient  to  us,  never  consenting  to 
serve  our  purposes.  Men  strive  to  subordinate  love  to  themselves, 
to  warp  it  to  the  uses  of  their  everyday  mode  of  life,  and  to  their 
souls' uses;  but  it  is  impossible  to  subordinate  love  to  anything,  and 
it  mercilessly  revenges  itself  upon  these  little  mortals  who  would 
subordinate  God  to  themselves  and  make  Him  serve  them.  It  con- 
fuses all  their  calculations,  and  forces  them  to  do  things  which  con- 
found themselves,  forcing  them  to  serve  itself,  to  do  what  it  wants. 

Although  our  relation  to  love  is  so  naive,  there  is  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  men  cannot  take  toward  it  an  entirely  different  atti- 
tude, or  that  they  always  have  been  or  always  will  be  completely 
bound  by  materialism,  without  flashes  of  understanding  of  the 
wondrous  in  love. 

Somewhere,  in  the  distant  spaces  of  time,  stand  the  magnificent 
temples  of  Love,  there  pass  processions  of  priests  and  priestesses, 
and  therein  are  performed  the  rituals  of  strange  cults,  full  of  deep 
mysticism,  sometimes  shot  through  by  the  flaming  lightnings  of 
revelations  most  profound. 

All  this  is  too  little  understood  by  us ;  we  have  wandered  too  far 
from  the  understanding  of  these  mysteries,  we  have  perverted 
them  in  our  perception,  lost  the  keys  to  their  inner  mystical  sig- 
nificance. Only  the  religions  of  the  Orient  have  preserved  a  living 
connection  with  the  cosmical  understanding  of  love.  This  re- 
ligious attitude  toward  love,  which  alone  can  reveal  its  inner 
content,  may  be  seen  in  the  phallic  foundation  of  Hinduism,  in 
the  deities  of  Hindu  mythology,  in  numerous  still  existing  cere- 
monies, and  particularly  in  those  secret  cults  which  still  survive 
in  many  places  in  India.  This  idea  is  the  principal  content  of  the 
mysterious  Kama-Yoga,  to  which  are  consecrated  several  temples 
in  different  parts  of  India  (for  example,  the  "temple  of  Raja  from 
Nepal"  at  Bernares).  In  the  "Western  occultism",  in  alchemy, 
in  magic,  is  also  sometimes  discernible  a  profound  and  fine  un- 
derstanding of  love,  united  with  the  search  for  the  wonderous. 

But  at  the  present  time  there  is  nothing  so  full  of  confusion  as 
our  understanding  of  love.    We  find  no  path  among  contradictions, 


166  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

and  the  age-long  accumulation  of  lies  and  calumnies  against  love. 
Nor  shall  we  understand  it  until  we  understand  its  great  noumenal, 
transcendental  meaning. 

The  chief  error  that  men  make  about  love  consists  in  the  fact 
that  they  believe  in  its  reality,  and  ascribe  love  to  themselves;  or, 
generally,  to  mankind.  It  seems  to  them  that  love  begins  in 
them,  belongs  to  them,  ends  in  them.  And  even  when  they  ad- 
mit that  everything  in  the  world  depends  upon  love  and  moves  by 
love,  they  still  seek  in  themselves  the  sources  of  love. 

Mistaken  about  the  origin  of  love,  men  are  mistaken  about  its 
result.  Positivistic  and  spiritistic  morality  equally  recognize  in 
love  only  one  possible  result — children,  the  propagation  of  the 
species.  But  this  objective  result,  which  may  or  may  not  be,  is  in 
any  case  an  effect  of  the  outer,  objective  side  of  love,  of  the  ma- 
terial fact  of  impregnation.  If  it  is  possible  to  see  in  love  nothing 
more  than  this  material  fact  and  the  desire  for  it,  so  be  it;  but  in 
reality  love  consists  not  at  all  in  a  material  fact,  and  the  results 
of  it — except  material  ones — may  manifest  themselves  on  quite 
another  plane.  This  other  plane,  upon  which  love  acts,  and  the 
ignored,  hidden  results  of  love,  are  not  difficult  to  understand, 
even  from  the  strictly  positivistic,  scientific  standpoint. 

To  science,  which  studies  life  from  this  side,  the  purpose  of 
love  is  the  continuation  of  life.  More  exactly,  love  is  a  link  in  the 
chain  of  facts  supporting  the  continuation  of  life.  The  force 
which  attracts  the  two  sexes  to  one  another  is  acting  in  the  inter- 
ests of  the  continuation  of  the  species,  and  is  accordingly  created 
by  the  forms  of  the  continuation  of  the  species.  But  if  we  regard 
love  in  this  way,  then  it  is  impossible  not  to  recognize  that  there  is 
much  more  of  this  force  than  is  necessary.  Herein  lies  the  key  to  the 
correct  understanding  of  the  true  nature  of  love.  There  is  more  of 
this  force  than  is  necessary,  infinitely  more.  In  reality  only  an 
infinitesimal  part  of  love's  force  incarnate  in  humanity  is  utilized 
for  the  purpose  of  the  continuation  of  the  species.  But  where 
does  the  major  part  of  that  force  go? 

We  know  that  nothing  can  be  lost.  If  energy  exists,  then  it 
must  transform  itself  into  something.  Now  if  a  merely  negligible 
percentage  of  energy  goes  into  the  creation  of  the  future  by  be- 
getting, then  the  remainder  must  go  into  the  creation  of  the  future 
also,  but  in  another  way.  We  have  in  the  physical  world  many 
cases  in  which  the  direct  function  is  effected  by  a  very  small  per- 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  167 

centage  of  the  consumed  energy,  and  the  greater  part  is  spent 
without  return,  as  it  were.  But  of  course  this  greater  part  of 
energy  does  not  disappear,  is  not  wasted,  but  accomplishes  other 
results  quite  different  from  the  direct  function. 

Take  the  example  of  a  common  candle.  It  gives  light,  but  it 
also  gives  considerably  more  heat  than  light.  Light  is  the  direct 
function  of  a  candle,  heat  the  indirect,  but  we  get  more  heat  than 
light.  A  candle  is  a  furnace  adapted  to  the  purpose  of  lighting. 
In  order  to  give  light  a  candle  must  burn.  Combustion  is  a  neces- 
sary condition  for  the  receiving  of  light  from  a  candle;  it  is  im- 
possible to  ignore  this  combustion ;  but  the  same  combustion  gives 
heat.  At  first  thought  it  appears  that  the  heat  from  a  candle  is 
spent  unproductively ;  sometimes  it  is  superfluous,  unpleasant, 
annoying;  if  a  room  is  lighted  by  candles  it  will  soon  grow  ex- 
cessively hot.  But  the  fact  remains  that  light  is  received  from  a 
candle  only  because  of  combustion — by  the  development  of  heat  and 
the  incandescence  of  volatilized  gases. 

The  same  thing  is  true  in  the  case  of  love.  We  may  say  that  a 
merely  negligible  part  of  love's  energy  goes  into  posterity;  the 
greater  part  is  spent  by  the  fathers  and  mothers  on  their  personal 
emotions  as  it  were.  But  this  also  is  necessary.  Without  this  ex- 
penditure the  principal  thing  could  not  be  achieved.  Only  because 
of  these  at  first  sight  collateral  results  of  love,  only  because  of  all 
this  tempest  of  emotions,  feelings,  effervescences,  desires, 
thoughts,  dreams,  fantasies,  inner  creation;  only  because  of  the 
beauty  which  it  creates,  can  love  fulfill  its  immediate  function. 

Moreover — and  this  perhaps  is  the  most  important — the  super- 
fluous energy  is  not  wasted  at  all,  but  is  transformed  into  other 
forms  of  energy,  possible  to  discover.  Generally  speaking,  the 
significance  of  the  indirect  results  may  very  often  be  of  more  im- 
portance than  the  significance  of  direct  ones.  And  since  we  are 
able  to  trace  how  the  energy  of  love  transforms  itself  into  instincts, 
ideas,  creative  forces  on  different  planes  of  life;  into  symbols  of 
art,  song,  music,  poetry;  so  can  we  easily  imagine  how  the  same 
energy  may  transform  itself  into  a  higher  order  of  intuition,  into  a 
higher  consciousness  which  will  reveal  to  us  a  marvelous  and 
mysterious  world. 

In  all  living  nature  (and  perhaps  also  in  that  which  we  consider 
as  dead)  love  is  the  motive  force  which  drives  the  creative  activity 
in  the  most  diverse  directions. 


168  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

In  springtime,  with  the  first  awakening  of  love's  emotions,  the 
birds  begin  to  sing,  and  to  build  nests. 

Of  course  a  positivist  would  strive  to  explain  all  this  very 
simply:  singing  acts  as  an  attraction  between  the  females 
and  the  males,  and  so  forth.  But  even  a  positivist  will  not  be  in  a 
position  to  deny  that  there  is  a  good  deal  more  of  this  singing  than 
is  necessary  for  the  "continuation  of  the  species."  For  a  posi- 
tivist, indeed,  "singing"  is  merely  "an  accident,"  a  "by-product." 
But  in  reality  it  may  be  that  this  singing  is  the  principal  function 
of  a  given  species,  the  realization  of  its  existence,  the  purpose  pur- 
sued by  nature  in  creating  this  species;  and  that  this  singing  is 
necessary,  not  so  much  to  attract  the  females,  as  for  some  gen- 
eral harmony  of  nature  which  we  only  rarely  and  imperfectly 
sense. 

Thus  in  this  case  we  observe  that  what  appears  to  be  a  collateral 
function  of  love,  from  the  standpoint  of  the  individual,  may  serve 
as  a  principal  function  of  the  species. 

Furthermore,  there  are  no  fledglings  yet:  there  is  even  no  inti- 
mation of  them,  but  "homes"  are  prepared  for  them  nevertheless. 
Love  inspires  this  orgy  of  activity,  and  instinct  directs  it,  because 
it  is  expedient  from  the  standpoint  of  the  species.  At  the  first 
awakening  of  love  this  work  begins.  One  and  the  same  desire 
creates  a  new  generation  and  those  conditions  under  which  this 
new  generation  will  live.  One  and  the  same  desire  urges  forward 
creative  activity  in  all  directions,  brings  the  pairs  together  for  the 
birth  of  a  new  generation,  and  makes  them  build  and  create  for  this 
same  future  generation. 

We  observe  the  same  thing  in  the  world  of  men :  there  too  love 
is  the  creative  force.  And  the  creative  activity  of  love  does  not 
manifest  itself  in  one  direction  only,  but  in  many  ways.  It  is  indeed 
probable  that  by  the  spur  of  love,  Eros,  humanity  is  aroused  to  the 
fulfillment  of  its  principal  function,  of  which  we  know  nothing,  but 
only  at  times  by  glimpses  hazily  perceive. 

But  even  without  reference  to  the  purpose  of  the  existence  of 
humanity,  within  the  limits  of  the  knowable  we  must  recognize 
that  all  the  creative  activity  of  humanity  results  from  love.  Our 
entire  world  revolves  around  love  as  its  center.  Creation  of  every 
sort  is  necessarily  the  result  of  sex  activity,  the  fruit  of  a  conscious 
or  unconscious  union.  One  side  of  this  fact  we  know  very  well:  we 
know  that  woman  alone,  without  man,  cannot  produce  children. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  169 

The  creative  force  of  man  is  necessary;  impregnation  is  necessary. 
We  know  this,  but  we  fail  to  recognize  that  all  the  creative  activity 
of  man  comes  from  woman.  Just  as  from  the  outer,  physical  side 
— for  the  purpose  of  the  birth  of  children — man  impregnates 
woman,  communicates  to  her  the  beginnings  of  new  life;  so  from 
the  inner,  spiritual  side,  woman,  or  the  dreaming  and  romancing 
about  woman,  fecundates  man,  communicates  to  him  the  be- 
ginnings of  new  ideas,  new  intuitions. 

All  ideal,  all  intuitive,  creation  of  man,  is  the  result  of  that 
energy  which  flows  from  "love,"  either  secret  or  avowed.  All 
creative  activity  is  of  necessity  a  conscious  or  unconscious  inter- 
action between  the  two  sexes.  Without  this  interchange  of  emo- 
tion no  creation  is  possible.  For  asexual  human  beings  is  possible 
only  the  "  education  of  the  children  of  others."  Cherchez  la  femme! 
It  is  necessary  to  apply  this  principle,  not  alone  to  the  detection  of 
crimes,  but  to  all  culture  created  by  man — and  therefore  by  woman. 
In  the  creative  activity  of  every  epoch  it  is  possible  to  find  the 
traces  of  the  influence  of  the  women  of  that  particular  epoch. 
Moslem  civilization  lost  its  ascendency  because  it  deprived  its 
women  of  freedom.  The  history  of  culture — this  is  the  history 
of  love! 

It  is  quite  immaterial,  for  the  inspiration  of  creation,  that 
woman  should  know  what  she  gives  to  man.  On  the  other  hand, 
she  may  have  no  slightest  comprehension  of  those  ideas  which 
she  arouses,  for  she  acts  by  her  mere  presence,  by  her  beauty, 
by  her  infinite,  illusive  feminity,  by  her  expressed  or  unexpressed 
desire.  A  woman  may  even  neither  see  nor  know  a  man,  may  pass 
him  by,  and  nevertheless  fecundate  his  fancy,  his  imagination,  his 
creative  energy. 

Infinitely  various  are  the  means  of  this  fecundation  of  the 
spirit:  sometimes  pleasure  is  necessary,  and  all  the  beauty  and 
fullness  of  love;  sometimes  suffering  penetrating  to  the  very 
depths  of  the  soul;  and  sometimes  crime  is  necessary  for  it,  some- 
times heroism,  self-abnegation,  self-sacrifice. 

Love  unfolds  in  a  human  being  traits  of  his  which  he  never 
knew  in  himself.  In  love  there  is  much  both  of  the  Stone  Age  and 
of  the  Witches'  Sabbath.  By  anything  less  than  love  many  men 
cannot  be  induced  to  commit  a  crime,  to  be  guilty  of  a  treason,  to 
reanimate  in  themselves  such  feelings  as  they  thought  to  have 
killed  out  long  ago.    In  love  is  hidden  an  infinity  of  egoism,  van- 


170  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

ity  and  selfishness.  Love  is  the  potent  force  that  tears  off  all 
masks,  and  men  who  run  away  from  love  do  so  in  order  that  they 
may  preserve  their  masks. 

If  creation,  the  birth  of  ideas,  is  the  light  which  comes  from  love, 
then  this  light  comes  from  a  great  fire.  In  this  eternally  burning 
fire  in  which  humanity  and  all  the  world  are  being  incessantly 
purified,  all  the  forces  of  the  human  spirit  and  of  genius  are 
being  evolved  and  refined;  and  perhaps  indeed,  from  this  same 
fire  or  by  its  aid  a  new  force  will  arise  which  shall  deliver  from 
the  chains  of  matter  all  who  follow  where  it  leads. 

Speaking  not  figuratively,  but  literally,  it  may  be  said  that 
love,  being  the  most  powerful  of  all  emotions,  unveils  in  the  soul  of 
man  all  its  qualities  patent  and  latent;  and  it  may  also  unfold 
those  new  potencies  which  even  now  constitute  the  object  of 
occultism  and  mysticism — the  development  of  powers  in  the 
human  soul  so  deeply  hidden  that  by  the  majority  of  men  their 
very  existence  is  denied. 

But  the  obstacles  to  such  an  understanding  of  love  are  our 
materialism — unconscious  and  avowed — and  those  Christian- 
Buddhistic  tendencies  which  during  the  lapse  of  ages  have  power- 
fully affected  our  attitude  toward  the  whole  problem  of  sex. 

I  find  a  very  characteristic  opinion  on  this  matter  in  the  book 
"Liberie  et  Volonte''  by  Prof.  Lutoslawsky.  He  is  endeavoring  to 
prove  that  the  solution  of  the  problem  of  man,  striving  for  spir- 
itual development,  consists  in  the  denial  of  love. 

The  sexual  act  realizes  a  desire,  the  most  turbulent  and  the  most 
exalted  of  all  desires  of  the  body;  that  desire  the  satisfaction  of  which 
brings  to  a  human  being  the  most  intense  pleasure  that  he  knows. 
In  order  to  struggle  against  this  desire,  and  to  abstain  from  this  pleasure, 
it  is  necessary  to  have  a  clear  understanding  of  the  incompatibility  of 
these  satisfactions  with  the  most  sublime  aspirations  of  our  being. 
The  fact  is  established  by  observation  that  intensive  aesthetic  or  intel- 
lectual activity  weakens  the  sexual  instinct,  and  sometimes  eliminates 
it  altogether,  while  on  the  other  hand,  satisfaction  of  this  instinct 
quenches  aesthetic  and  intellectual  inspiration. 

Thus  chastity  is  the  natural  regime  of  life  which  is  full  of  inspiration, 
and  men  who  cannot  live  without  the  usual  sexual  satisfactions  deprive 
themselves  of  the  intimate  union  with  the  world  of  the  invisible  from 
which  inspirations  flow. 

That  creative  force  which  manifests  in  its  most  perfect  form  in  art 
differentiates  man  from  all  beings  standing  lower  than  he,  and  it  is  neces- 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  171 

sary  to  pay  for  this  force  by  the  abstention  from  the  most  powerful  of  all 
animal  satisfactions.  .  .  In  giving  birth  to  children,  men  and  women 
lose  a  certain  amount  of  their  individual  power,  and  sacrifice  part  of 
their  vital  forces  in  order  to  give  birth  to  new  organisms.  .  .  So  far 
as  those  who  are  striving  toward  the  exalted  ideals  of  creation  are  con- 
cerned, chastity  is  for  them  a  prime  condition. 

It  is  necessary  to  dispose  of  that  superficial  argument  which  is  usually 
advanced  when  conversation  touches  the  foregoing  theme.  To  the 
propaganda  of  celibacy  men  retort  that  the  accomplishment  of  the  ideal 
of  celibacy  would  threaten  the  very  existence  of  humanity.  But  we  do 
not  know  at  all  if  a  humanity  composed  of  chaste  individuals  would  be 
subject  to  senility  and  death  as  before,  because  neither  senility  nor  death 
has  ever  been  proven  to  be  a  necessity  of  organic  life.* 

Prof.  Lutoslawsky's  book  serves  as  a  curious  example  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  same  arguments  may  be  applied  to  the  proof 
of  diametrically  opposite  theses.  Prof.  Lutoslawsky  is  entirely 
dogmatical  from  beginning  to  end,  and  his  whole  book  is  a  defense 
of  predetermined  dogmas. 

Prof.  Lutoslawsky  is  defending  celibacy  and  chastity  because  he 
needs  thereby  to  establish  the  dogma  of  the  celibacy  of  the 
Catholic  priesthood,  in  the  same  way  that  he  affirms  elsewhere 
that  the  Poles  are  a  nation  and  that  the  Hebrews  are  not  a  nation. 
In  his  opinion  the  Poles  are  a  nation  because  they  have  a  common 
language  and  a  common  land,  for  which  they  strive:  and  the 
Hebrews  have  not.  He  forgets  to  take  into  consideration  one 
little  circumstance,  that  a  little  over  a  century  has  passed  from 
the  time  of  the  partition  of  Poland,  but  from  the  time  of  the  dis- 
persion of  the  Hebrews  almost  two  thousand  years  have  elapsed. 
One  may  accuse  the  Hebrews  of  anything;  but  to  try  to  prove  that 
they  have  no  nationality  is  just  as  ridiculous  as  to  affirm  that 
senility  and  death  have  not  been  proven  to  be  necessities  of  life. 
Prof.  Lutoslawsky's  book  is  like  this  all  the  way  through.  He 
calls  himself  a  "spiritualist,"  hurls  his  polemics  against  "pseudo- 
mystics;"  but  in  reality  he  slips  and  falls  on  every  step,  displaying 
the  most  candid  materialism  and  Polish-Catholic  (i.  е.,  more 
definitely,  politico-clerical)  propaganda  which  it  would  be  possible 
to  conduct,  without  any  "spiritualism"  whatsoever. 

Lutoslawsky's  views  on  the  subject  of  love  are  lower-dimen- 
sional and  materialistic.  Love  to  him  is  merely  "satisfaction." 
In  order  to  understand  the  extent  of  his  narrowness  it  is  in- 

*  Translated  from  the  Russian  of  P.  D.  Ouspensky.     Transl. 


172  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

structive  to  take  up,  after  Prof.  Lutoslawsky's  book,  "The  Drama 
of  Love  and  Death"  by  Edward  Carpenter,  from  which  I  have 
already  quoted.  Being  himself  half  ascetic  and  half  hermit, 
Carpenter  sings  of  love  as  might  an  ancient  Sufi.  He  tells  truly 
about  those  sides  of  love  which  Prof.  Lutoslawsky  represents 
falsely :  about  that  regeneration  which  love  brings,  about  the  influx 
of  energy,  about  inspiration,  which  are  inseparably  linked  with 
love;  and  he  tells  of  the  necessity  of  an  "art  of  love"  which  shall 
bring  about  an  attitude  toward  love  infinitely  removed  from 
the  rectilinear  and  primitive  views  of  Lutoslawsky. 

Of  course,  if  one  were  to  agree  with  Prof.  Lutoslawsky  that  senil- 
ity and  death  are  not  proven  necessities  of  organic  life,  then  it  is 
possible  to  affirm  anything.  Prof.  Lutoslawsky  takes  the  same 
position  in  regard  to  this  particular  matter  as  does  Tolstoy, 
namely,  that  if  mankind  denied  sexual  desire,  nature  might  find 
some  other  means  of  continuing  the  species  on  earth.  Further  on 
he  affirms  that  the  propagation  of  posterity  can  be  completely 
divorced  from  passion,  from  delight;  and  in  this  case  he  consciously 
or  unconsciously  repeats  the  words  of  the  Judaic  code  of  morality, 
which  recognizes  and  admits  the  need  of  conjugation  (in  the  interest 
of  the  species),  but  which  prohibits  delight,  and  with  particular 
strictness  prohibits  a  husband  from  experiencing  delight  with  his 
own  wife.  This  fanaticism  of  ultra-materialistic  Judaism  is  held 
up  by  Lutoslawsky  as  the  very  crown  of  morality. 

That  which  humanity  receives  from  love  and  through  love 
seemingly  does  not  exist  for  Prof.  Lutoslawsky,  just  as  it  ceased 
to  exist  for  Tolstoy,  enfeebled  by  age.  Love  according  to  Lutos- 
lawsky's conception  of  it  is  merely  "conjugation,"  it  merely  "uses 
up  force."  Wherever  he  derived  the  idea  that  realized  love 
weakens  the  creative  intuition  is  his  secret;  but  he  builds  upon  it 
and  proves  the  necessity  for  asceticism,  which  is  realized,  well  or 
ill,  in  the  semi-monastical,  but  in  substance  political,  order  of 
"Elevsis";  founded  by  him. 

Generally  speaking,  there  is  nothing  more  "two-dimensional" 
or  more  cynical  than  the  sort  of  moralization  which  perceives  in 
love  only  sin  and  lust.  In  this  consists  one's  inability  to  take  the 
higher  view-point,  and  to  discover  the  true  meaning  of  it  all. 
For  example,  what  a  dark  lie  hides  in  all  the  moral  discourses  of 
"The  Kreutzer  Sonata"  and  "Afterward."  All  this  description 
of  love  in  anatomical  and  physiological  terms  is  the  same  sort  of 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  173 

false  representation  as  would  be  a  description  of  music  by  a  deaf 
man.  If  a  deaf  man  should  describe  a  piano  and  should  say  that 
it  is  a  black  box  on  three  feet,  open  on  one  side,  and  that  people 
knock  at  it  with  their  fingers,  this  would  be  quite  an  exact  de- 
scription. But  after  all  it  will  not  explain  why  some  weep  and 
others  laugh. 

In  the  first  edition  of  this  book,  in  those  sketches  which  took  the  place 
of  the  present  chapter,  among  other  things  I  made  the  attempt  to  classify 
love,  and  to  differentiate  between  "love"  (individualized  feeling)  from 
"sexual  emotion"  (not  individualized  and  undiscriminating  in  its  long- 
ing for  the  satisfaction  of  the  purely  physical  desire).  But  it  seems  to 
me  now  that  this  division,  like  all  similar  divisions,  is  unsatisfactory. 
The  difference  is  not  in  facts  but  in  men. 

There  are  men  who  are  cynical,  vulgar  and  two-dimensional  in  every- 
thing they  do  and  feel,  whether  it  be  "love,"  " dissoluteness"  or  "asceti- 
cism." Love  in  such  men  is  infallibly  accompanied  by  jealousy;  it 
degenerates  into  wickedness  and  hatred,  it  leads  to  murder,  to  the  throw- 
ing of  acid  and  so  forth. 

These  men  cannot  comprehend  a  love  without  jealousy.  And  jealousy 
is  the  slayer  of  the  sense  of  the  wondrous  in  love.  But  there  are  other  men 
in  whom  even  the  general,  and  not  the  individualized  sex  attraction  will 
be  fine,  full  of  thought,  and  of  bright  sparks  of  cosmical  feeling. 

On  earth  there  are  living  two  entirely  different  races  of  men;  and  the 
difficulty  of  making  psychological  distinctions  depends,  in  great  measure, 
upon  the  fact  that  we  endeavor  to  impose  on  all  men  common  character- 
istics which  they  do  not  possess. 

For  another  reason  it  is  impossible  to  divide  love  into  two  classes: 
(1)  physical  desire  without  personal  attachment,  and  (2)  physico- 
psychical  love  with  personal  attachment.  There  must  be  recognized  also 
the  possibility  of  a  third  type  of  relation,  in  which  the  principal  element 
is  a  conscious  search  for  the  wondrous  in  love  and  through  love.  For 
the  higher  type  of  men  love  without  this  search  for  the  wondrous  becomes 
almost  impossible. 

I  have  deliberately  designated  as  cynical  that  moralism  which 
sees  in  love  merely  one  purpose — the  propagation  of  posterity 
(or,  subjectively,  a  physical  satisfaction) — a  purpose  which  should 
be  achieved  as  quickly  as  possible,  disregarding  all  the  rest.  Cyn- 
icism may  be  expressed  not  in  dissoluteness  only.  There  may  be 
cynical  moralism  and  even  cynical  asceticism,  just  as  there  is 
cynical  dissoluteness.  It  all  depends  upon  our  point  of  view  of 
things,  upon  our  relation  to  them.  Cynicism — this  is  the  psy- 
chology of  a  two-dimensional  being.  The  dog  (kunos)  is  such  a  two- 
dimensional  being.     Two-dimensional  morality  will  be  inevitably 


174  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

a  cynical  morality.  It  will  everywhere  and  in  all  things  suspect  its 
own  tendencies,  because  it  does  not  know  the  tendencies  of  others 
and  does  not  understand  them. 

V.  V.  RosanofT  has  interesting  things  to  say  in  the  book  "Men 
of  the  Moonlight."  In  his  opinion  the  idea  of  sinfulness,  the  idea 
of  "abomination,"  the  idea  of  asceticism,  arose  out  of  sexual 
perversion,  out  of  hermaphrodism,  out  of  "gynandria"  and 
"androgynia."  And  this  hermaphrodism  can  be  expressed  not  in 
anything  physical,  but  only  psychically — it  can  be  only  a  herma- 
phrodism of  the  soul. 

Sodomy  gave  birth  to  the  idea  that  love  is  sin.  In  reality,  what  is 
hermaphrodism,  psychologically? — The  tortures  of  Tantalus — every- 
thing in  himself  and  inaccessible.  The  next  thing  is  the  hatred  of  this 
inaccessible,  terror  before  it,  mystical  horror,  an  abomination  from  which 
it  is  necessary  to  run  away. 

All  this  is  interesting  although  it  sounds  somewhat  paradoxical. 
To  regard  love  as  an  abomination  undoubtedly  implies  some 
measure  of  perversion.  But  asceticism  can  be  founded  upon  quite 
other  motives.  The  fact  is  that  in  the  majority  of  cases  love,  as  it 
exists  in  modern  life,  has  become  a  trifling  away  of  feelings,  of 
sensations.  And  asceticism  may  be  an  escape  from  all  this  trivial- 
ity. Moreover,  mysticism  demands  solitude.  It  is  difficult,  in 
the  conditions  which  govern  life  in  the  world,  to  imagine  such  a 
love  as  would  not  interfere  with  mystical  aspirations.  Temples  of 
love  and  the  mystical  celebration  of  love's  mysteries  exist  in 
reality  no  longer:  there  is  the  "every-day  manner  of  life",  and 
psychological  labyrinths,  from  which  those  who  rise  a  little  above 
the  ordinary  level  can  only  desire  to  run  away. 

For  this  reason  certain  fine  forms  of  asceticism  are  developing 
quite  naturally.  This  asceticism  does  not  slander  love,  does  not 
blaspheme  against  it,  does  not  try  to  convince  itself  that  love  is  an 
abomination  from  which  it  is  necessary  to  run  away.  It  is  Platon- 
ism  rather  than  asceticism.  It  recognizes  that  love  is  the  sun,  but 
often  does  not  see  its  way  to  live  in  the  sunlight,  and  so  considers  it 
better  not  to  see  the  sun  at  all,  to  divine  it  in  the  soul  only,  rather 
than  receive  its  light  through  darkened  or  smoked  glasses. 

In  general,  however,  love  represents  for  men  too  great  an 
enigma;  and  often  the  denial  of  love  and  asceticism  take  on 
strange    and    unnatural    forms,    even    with    persons    who    are 


TERTIUM   ORGANTJM  175 

quite  sincere,  but  unable  to  understand  the  great  mystical  aspect 
of  love.  When  one  encounters  these  perversions  of  love,  one  in- 
voluntarily calls  to  mind  the  words  of  Zarathustra* : 

Voluptuousness:  unto  all  hair-shirted  despisers  of  the  body,  a  string 
and  stake;  and  cursed  as  "the  world"  by  all  backworldsmen:  for  it 
mocketh  and  befooleth  all  erring,  misinferring  teachers. 

Voluptuousness:  to  the  rabble  the  slow  fire  at  which  it  is  burnt:  to 
all  wormy  wood,  to  all  stinking  rags,  the  prepared  heat  and  stew 
furnace. 

Voluptuousness :  to  free  hearts,  a  thing  innocent  and  free,  the  garden- 
happiness  of  the  earth,  all  the  future's  thanks-overflow  to  the  present. 

Voluptuousness :  only  to  the  withered  a  sweet  poison :  to  the  lion-willed, 
however,  the  great  cordial,  and  the  reverently  saved  wine  of  wines. 

Voluptuousness:  the  great  symbolic  happiness  of  a  higher  happiness 
and  highest  hope.  For  to  many  is  marriage  promised  and  more  than 
marriage — to  many  that  are  more  unknown  to  each  other  than  man  and 
woman — and  who  hath  fully  understood  how  unknown  to  each  other  are 
man  and  woman. 

I  have  dwelt  so  long  on  the  subject  of  the  understanding  of  love 
because  it  has  the  most  vital  significance;  because  to  the  major- 
ity of  men,  approaching  the  threshold  of  the  great  mystery,  much 
is  closed  or  opened  to  them  in  this  way,  and  because  for  many  this 
question  represents  the  greatest  obstacle.  It  is  almost  naive  to  say 
so  much  in  defense  of  love.  Contemporary  thought  is  not  ex- 
hausted by  such  writers  as  Lutoslawsky  and  Tolstoy:  there  exist 
quite  different  paths  of  thought.  But  one  thing  remains  invari- 
able in  our  relation  to  love — we  are  unable  to  reconcile  a  broad 
and  free  idea  of  love  with  the  idea  of  morality  and  spiritual 
aspirations.  The  result  of  this  is  either  the  absence  of  any  moral- 
ity whatsoever,  or  the  limitation  of  love — morality  hostile  or  sus- 
picious in  its  relation  to  love. 

I  mean  by  morality  not  a  code  (no  matter  of  what  kind)  of  pre- 
determined rules,  but  the  inner  necessity  for  the  appraisal  of  one's 
actions  from  the  standpoint  of  the  higher  understanding,  the 
inner  necessity  for  the  co-ordination  of  one's  actions  and  one's  life 
with  those  ideas  to  which  thought  has  attained. 

And  the  power  thus  to  coordinate  love  and  thought  can  appear  in 
men  when — and  only  when — they  have  come  to  understand  that 
love  is  not  a  phenomenon  of  this  world,  and  that  it  does  not  belong 
to  them,  but  is  infinity  itself,  with  which  they  sometimes  come 
weakly  in  contact. 

*F.  Nietzche:    "Thus  Spake  Zarathustra."    (New  York,  Boni  and  Liveright.)  pp.  195,  196. 


176  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

To  feel  this  infinity  it  is  necessary  to  understand  the  unreality 
of  everything  material  and  factual,  and  the  reality  of  fantasy  and 
the  world  of  the  imagination. 

The  material  world  does  not  exist. 

Any  man  who  is  able  to  sense  and  understand  this  will  sense 
and  understand  it  best  of  all  and  clearest  of  all  in  love,  for  that 
love  is  the  most  real  which  is  the  most  fantastic.  But  it  is  neces- 
sary both  to  feel  and  to  understand  what  all  this  means. 

In  love  the  most  important  element  is  that  which  is  not,  which 
absolutely  does  not  exist  from  the  usual  worldly,  materialistic  point 
of  view. 

In  this  sensing  of  that  which  is  not,  and  in  the  contact 
through  it  with  the  world  of  the  wondrous,  i.  е.,  truly  real,  con- 
sists the  principal  element  of  love  in  human  life. 

It  is  a  well  known  psychological  fact  that  in  moments  of  power- 
ful emotion,  of  great  joy  or  great  suffering,  everything  happening 
round  about  a  man  seems  to  him  unreal — a  dream.  This  is  the 
beginning  of  the  soul's  awakening.  When  a  man  in  a  dream 
begins  to  be  conscious  of  the  fact  that  he  is  asleep  and  that  what 
he  sees  is  a  dream,  then  he  is  waking  up;  so  also  the  soul,  beginning 
to  be  conscious  of  the  fact  that  all  visible  life  is  a  dream,  ap- 
proaches its  awakening.  And  the  more  powerful,  the  brighter,  the 
inner  emotions  are,  so  much  the  more  quickly  will  the  moment  of 
consciousness  of  the  unreality  of  life  come. 

The  purpose  of  love  is  the  awakening  of  the  soul.  But  to  attain 
this  purpose  the  love-flame  must  burn  at  the  maximum  of  clear- 
ness and  intensity.  This  is  possible  only  when  there  are  no  false 
views  upon  the  subject  of  love,  and  only  for  those  who  are  not 
hopelessly  sunk  in  materiality. 

Love  sorts  out  and  selects  men. 

The  fan  is  in  His  hand,  and  He  will  thoroughly  purge  this  floor,  and 
gather  His  wheat  into  the  garner;  but  He  will  burn  up  the  chaff  with 
unquenchable  fire. 

Love  is  this  Great  Sifter.  Nature  has  many  methods  of  "sift- 
ing," and  love  is  one  of  the  chief.  Those  who  are  able  to  feel  that 
which  is  not,  go  in  one  direction,  and  those  who  are  inapt,  who 
know  facts  only — in  another.  In  love,  clearer  than  anywhere 
else,  are  manifest  the  differences  between  two  fundamental  types 
of  men,  the  higher  and  the  lower  race — the  "wheat"  and  "tares" 
of  humanity. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  177 

But  that  relation  to  love  which  characterizes  the  higher  race 
arises  spontaneously  only  in  rare  cases:  it  usually  exists  but  in 
potentiality,  and  may  be  developed,  or  suppressed  and  replaced,  by 
another  and  inferior  type.  And  of  course  the  gospel  of  men  of 
materialistic  views,  with  whatever  words  this  materialism  is  dis- 
guised, interferes  more  than  anything  else  with  this  cultivation 
of  the  higher  understanding  of  love. 

The  reasonings  of  Lutoslawsky  and  Tolstoy  show  how  the  ma- 
terialistic understanding  of  love  may  limit  a  man.  Love  cannot 
be  measured  by  materialistic  standards;  and  men  fatally  enmesh 
themselves  in  their  own  imaginings,  and  enmesh  others.  The 
question  of  love  is  too  momentous,  too  complex  and  too  mys- 
tically-elusive, to  be  considered  as  on  one  plane. 

It  is  very  interesting  to  consider  love  and  men's  relation  to  love 
in  the  light  of  that  method  and  those  analogies  which  we  have 
already  applied  to  the  comparative  study  of  different  dimensions. 

Again  it  is  necessary  to  imagine  a  world  of  plane  beings,  ob- 
serving phenomena  entering  their  plane  from  another  unknowable 
world  (such  as  the  change  of  the  color  of  lines  on  the  plane,  in 
reality  depending  upon  the  rotation  through  the  plane  of  a  wheel 
with  many-colored  spokes).  The  plane  beings  believe  that  the 
phenomena  arise  within  the  limits  of  their  plane,  from  causes  also 
belonging  to  the  same  plane,  and  that  they  are  finished  there. 
Also,  all  similar  phenomena  are  to  them  identical,  such  as  two 
circles,  which  in  reality  belong  to  two  entirely  different  objects. 

On  this  foundation  they  erect  their  science  and  their  morality. 
Yet  if  they  would  decide  to  discard  their  "two-dimensional"  psy- 
chology and  try  to  understand  the  true  substance  of  these  phe- 
nomena, then  with  the  aid  and  by  means  of  these  phenomena  they 
could  sever  their  connection  with  their  plane,  arise,  fly  up  above 
it,  and  discover  a  great  unknown  world. 

The  question  of  love  holds  exactly  the  same  place  in  our 
life. 

Only  he  who  can  see  considerably  beyond  the  facts  discerns  love's 
real  meaning;  and  it  is  possible  to  illumine  these  very  facts  by  the 
light  of  that  which  lies  behind  them. 

And  he  who  is  able  to  see  beyond  the  "facts"  begins  to  discern 
much  of  "newness"  in  love  and  through  love. 

I  shall  quote  in  this  connection  a  poem  in  prose  by  Edward 
Carpenter  from  the  book  "Towards  Democracy." 


178  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

THE  OCEAN  OF  SEX 

To  hold  in  continence  the  great  sea,  the  great  ocean  of  Sex,  within  one, 

With  flux  and  reflux  pressing  on  the  bounds  of  the  body,  the  beloved 
genitals, 

Vibrating,  swaying  emotional  to  the  star-glint  of  the  eyes  of  all  human 
beings, 

Reflecting  Heaven  and  all  Creatures, 

How  wonderful ! 

Scarcely  a  figure,  male  or  female,  approaches,  but  a  tremor  travels 
across  it. 

As  when  on  the  cliff  which  bounds  the  edge  of  a  pond  someone  moves, 
then  in  the  bowels  of  the  water  also  there  is  a  mirrored  movement, 

So  on  the  edge  of  this  Ocean. 

The  glory  of  the  human  form,  even  faintly  outlined  under  the  trees 
or  by  the  shore,  convulses  it  with  far  reminiscences; 

(Yet  strong  and  solid  the  sea-banks,  not  lightly  overpassed) ; 

Till  maybe  to  the  touch,  to  the  approach,  to  the  incantation  of  the 
eyes  of  one, 

It  bursts  forth,  uncontrollable. 

О  wonderful  ocean  of  Sex, 

Ocean  of  millions  and  millions  of  tiny  seed-like  human  forms  con- 
tained (if  they  be  truly  contained)  within  each  person, 

Mirror  of  the  very  universe, 

Sacred  temple  and  innermost  shrine  of  each  body,  Ocean-river  flowing 
ever  on  through  the  great  trunk  and  branches  of  Humanity, 

From  which  after  all  the  individual  only  springs  like  a  leaf -bud! 

Ocean  which  we  so  wonderfully  contain  (if  indeed  we  do  not  contain 
thee) ,  and  yet  who  containest  us ! 

Sometimes  when  I  feel  and  know  thee  within,  and  identify  myself 
with  thee, 

Do  I  understand  that  I  also  am  of  the  dateless  brood  of  Heaven  and 
Eternity. 

Returning  to  that  from  which  I  started,  the  relation  between 
the  two  fundamental  laws  of  our  existence,  love  and  death,  the 
true  mutual  correlation  of  which  remains  enigmatical  and  incom- 
prehensible to  us,  I  shall  merely  recall  Schopenhauer's  words 
with  which  he  ends  his  "Counsels  and  Maxims." 

.  I  should  point  out  how  Beginning  and  End  meet  together,  and  how 
closely  and  intimately  Eros  is  connected  with  Death;  how  Orcus,  or 
Amenthes,  as  the  Egyptians  called  him,  is  not  only  the  receiver  but  the 
giver  of  all  things  .  .  .  Death  is  the  great  reservoir  of  Life.  Every- 
thing comes  from  Orcus — everything  that  is  alive  now  and  was  once 
there.  Could  we  but  understand  the  great  trick  by  which  that  is  done, 
all  the  world  would  be  clear.* 


*  Transl.  by  Т.  B.  Saunders,  M.  A.  MacMillan  Co.,  New  York. 


J 


«ем* 


CHAPTER  XVI 

The  phenomenal  and  the  noumenal  side  of  man.  "Man-in-himself". 
How  do  we  know  the  inner  side  of  man?  Can  we  know  of  the  exist- 
ence of  consciousnesses  in  conditions  of  space  not  analogous  to 
ours?  Brain  and  consciousness.  Unity  of  the  world.  Logical  im- 
possibility of  the  simultaneous  existence  of  spirit  and  matter. 
Either  all  spirit  or  all  matter.  Rational  and  irrational  actions  in 
nature  and  in  the  life  of  man.  Can  rational  actions  exist  alongside 
irrational?  The  world  as  an  accidentally  self -created  mechan- 
ical toy.  The  impossibility  of  consciousness  in  a  mechanical  uni- 
verse. The  irreconcilability  of  mechanicalness  with  the  existence 
of  consciousness.  The  fact  of  human  consciousness  as  de- 
stroying the  mechanistic  system.  The  consciousnesses  of  other 
sections  of  the  world.  How  may  we  know  about  them?  Kant  con- 
cerning "hosts".  Spinoza  on  the  knowledge  of  the  invisible  world. 
Necessity  for  the  intellectual  definition  of  that  which  can  be,  and 
that  which  cannot  be,  in  the  noumenal  world. 

ТЕ  know  what  man  is  only  imperfectly;  our  con- 
ceptions regarding  him  are  extremely  fallacious 
and  easily  create  new  illusions.  First  of  all,  we 
are  inclined  to  regard  man  as  a  certain  unity,  and 
to  regard  the  different  parts  and  functions  of 
man  as  being  bound  together,  and  dependent  upon  one  another. 
Moreover,  in  the  physical  apparatus,  in  man  visible,  we  see  the 
cause  of  all  his  properties  and  actions.  In  reality,  man  is  a  very 
complicated  something,  and  complicated  in  various  meanings  of 
the  word.  Many  sides  of  the  life  of  a  man  are  not  bound  together 
among  themselves  at  all,  or  are  bound  only  by  the  fact  that  they 
belong  to  one  man;  but  the  life  of  man  goes  on  simultaneously 
on  different  planes,  as  it  were,  while  the  phenomena  of  one  plane 
only  at  times  and  partially  touch  those  of  another,  and  may  not 
themselves  touch  at  all.  And  the  relations  of  the  same  man  to  the 
various  sides  of  himself  and  to  other  men  are  entirely  dissimilar. 
Man  includes  within  himself  all  three  of  the  above  mentioned 
orders  of  phenomena,  i.  е.,  he  represents  in  himself  the  combina- 
tion of  physical  phenomena  with  those  of  life  and  of  consciousness. 
And  the  mutual  relations  between  these  three  orders  of  phenomena 

179 


/ 

180  TERTITJM  ORGANUM 

are  infinitely  more  complex  than  we  are  accustomed  to  think. 
The  phenomena  of  consciousness  we  feel,  sense  and  are  conscious 
of  in  ourselves;  physical  phenomena  and  the  phenomena  of  life 
we  observe  and  make  conclusions  about  on  the  basis  of  experience. 
We  do  not  sense  the  phenomena  of  the  consciousness  of  others, 
i.  е.,  the  thoughts,  feelings  and  desires  of  another  man;  but  the 
fact  that  they  exist  in  him  we  conclude  from  what  he  says,  and  by 
analogy  with  ourselves.  We  know  that  in  ourselves  certain  ac- 
tions, certain  thoughts  and  feelings,  proceed  and  when  we  observe 
the  same  actions  in  another  man,  we  conclude  that  he  has  thought 
and  felt  like  us.  Analogy  with  ourselves — this  is  our  sole  cri- 
terion and  method  of  reasoning  and  drawing  conclusions  about 
the  phenomena  of  consciousness  in  other  men  if  we  cannot  com- 
municate with  them,  or  do  not  wish  to  believe  in  what  they  tell 
us  about  themselves. 

Suppose  that  I  should  live  among  men  without  the  possibility 
of  communicating  with  them  and  having  no  way  to  make  con- 
clusions based  upon  analogy;  in  that  case  I  should  be  surrounded 
by  moving  and  acting  automatons,  the  cause,  purpose  and  mean- 
ing of  whose  actions  would  be  perfectly  incomprehensible  to  me. 
Perhaps  I  would  explain  their  actions  by  "molecular  motion", 
perhaps  by  the  "influence  of  the  planets",  perhaps  by  "  spiritism", 
i.  е.,  by  the  influence  of  "spirits",  possibly  by  "chance"  or  by  a 
haphazard  combination  of  causes — but  in  any  case  I  should  not  and 
could  not  see  the  consciousness  in  the  depth  of  these  men's  actions. 

Concerning  the  existence  of  consciousness  I  can  usually  only 
conclude  by  analogy  with  myself.  I  know  that  certain  phenomena 
are  connected  in  me  with  my  possession  of  consciousness.  When 
I  see  the  same  phenomena  in  another  man  I  conclude  that  he  also 
possesses  consciousness.  But  I  cannot  convince  myself  directly 
of  the  existence  of  consciousness  in  another  man.  Studying  man 
from  one  side  only  I  should  stand  in  the  same  position  in  relation 
to  him  as,  according  to  Kant,  we  stand  with  relation  to  the  world 
surrounding  us.  We  know  merely  the  form  of  our  knowledge  of 
it.    The  world-in-itself  we  do  not  know. 

Thus  for  the  knowledge  of  man-in-himself  (i.  е.,  his  conscious- 
ness) I  have  two  methods — the  analogy  with  myself,  and  the 
intercourse  of  my  consciousness  with  the  consciousness  of  another 
by  the  exchange  of  thoughts.  Without  this,  man  is  for  me  a  phe- 
nomenon merely,  a  moving  automaton. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  181 

The  noumenon  of  a  man  is  his  consciousness  together  with 
everything  his  consciousness  includes  within  itself  and  that  with 
which  it  unites  him. 

,  In  "man"  are  opened  to  us  both  worlds,  though  the  noumenal 
world  is  open  only  slightly,  because  it  is  cognized  by  us  through 
the  phenomenal. 

Noumenal  means  apprehended  by  the  mind;  and  the  char- 
acteristic property  of  the  things  of  the  noumenal  world  is  that 
they  cannot  be  comprehended  by  the  same  method  by  which  the 
things  of  the  phenomenal  world  are  comprehended.  We  may 
speculate  about  the  things  of  the  noumenal  world;  we  may 
discover  them  by  a  process  of  reasoning,  and  by  means  of  analogy ; 
we  may  feel  them,  and  enter  into  some  sort  of  communion  with 
them;  but  we  can  neither  see,  hear,  touch,  weigh,  measure  them; 
nor  can  we  photograph  them  or  decompose  them  into  chemical 
elements  or  number  their  vibrations.  The  noumenal  world,  or  the 
world  of  causes,  is  for  us  the  world  of  metaphysical  facts. 

Thus  consciousness,  with  all  its  functions  and  with  all  its  con- 
tents— thoughts,  feelings,  desires,  will — relates  itself  to  the 
metaphysical  world.  We  cannot  know  even  a  single  element  of 
consciousness  objectively.  Emotion  as  such  is  a  thing  which  it  is 
impossible  to  see,  just  as  it  is  impossible  to  see  the  value  of  a  coin. 
You  can  see  the  stamp  upon  a  coin,  but  you  will  never  see  its 
value.  It  is  just  as  impossible  to  photograph  thought  as  it  is  to 
imagine  "Egyptian  darkness"  in  a  vial.  To  think  otherwise,  to 
experiment  with  the  photographing  of  thought,  simply  means  to 
be  unable  to  think  logically.  On  a  phonographic  record  are  the 
tracings  of  the  needle,  elevations  and  depressions,  but  there  is  no 
sound.  He  who  holds  a  phonographic  record  to  his  ear,  hoping  to 
hear  something,  will  be  sure  to  listen  in  vain. 

Including  within  himself  two  worlds,  the  phenomenal  and  the 
noumenal,  man  gives  us  the  opportunity  to  understand  in  what 
relation  these  worlds  stand  to  one  another  everywhere  throughout 
nature. 

We  have  already  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the  noumenon 
of  a  thing  consists  in  its  function  in  another  sphere — in  its  meaning 
which  is  incomprehensible  in  a  given  section  of  the  world.*    Next 

*  The  expression  "section  of  the  world"  is  taken  as  an  indicator  of  the  unreality  of  the  forms  of  each 
section.  The  world  is  infinite,  and  all  forms  are  infinite,  but  to  grasp  them  with  the  finite  brain-con- 
sciousness, i.  е.,  by  consciousness  reflected  in  the  brain,  we  must  imagine  the  infinite  forms  аз  being  finite, 
and  these  are  "sections  of  the  world."  The  world  is  one,  but  the  number  of  possible  sections  is  infinite. 
Let  us  imagine  an  apple:  it  is  one,  but  we  may  imagine  an  infinite  number  of  sections  in  all  directions  and 
these  sections  will  differ  from  one  another.  If  instead  of  an  apple  we  take  a  more  complicated  body,  for 
instance  the  body  of  some  animal:  then  the  sections  taken  in  different  directions  will  be  even  more  unlike 
one  another. 


182  TERTITJM   ORGANUM 

we  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  number  of  meanings  of  one 
and  the  same  thing  in  different  sections  of  the  world  must  be  in- 
finitely great  and  infinitely  various,  that  it  must  become  its  own 
opposite,  return  again  to  the  beginning  (from  our  standpoint) 
etc.,  etc.,  infinitely  expanding,  contracting  again,  and  so  forth. 

It  is  necessary  to  remember  that  the  noumenon  and  the  phe- 
nomenon are  not  different  things,  but  merely  different  aspects  of 
one  and  the  same  thing.  Thus  the  phenomenon  is  the  finite  expres- 
sion, in  the  sphere  of  our  knowledge  through  the  organs  of  sense, 
of  the  infinite  noumenon. 

From  our  standpoint  we  can  equally  say  that  a  certain  phe- 
nomenon, or  a  certain  group  of  phenomena,  from  the  side  of 
noumena,  is  expressed  by  the  consciousness  of  some  infinite  and 
multifarious  substance;  or  that  an  infinite  and  infinitely  multi- 
farious consciousness  is  expressed  to  us  by  that  or  another  definite 
phenomenon. 

A  phenomenon  is  the  three-dimensional  expression  of  a  given 
noumenon. 

This  three-dimensionality  depends  upon  the  three-dimensional 
forms  of  our  knowledge,  i.  е.,  speaking  simply,  upon  our  brains, 
nerves,  eyes,  and  finger-tips. 


In  "man"  we  have  found  that  his  noumenon  is  consciousness, 
and  that  therefore  in  consciousness  lies  the  solution  of  the  riddle 
of  the  functions  and  meanings  of  man  which  are  incomprehensible 
from  an  outside  point  of  view.  What  is  the  consciousness  of  man 
if  it  is  not  his  function— incomprehensible  in  the  three-dimen- 
sional section  of  the  world?  Truly,  if  we  shall  study  and  observe 
man  by  all  accessible  means,  objectively,  from  without,  we  shall 
never  discover  his  consciousness  and  shall  never  define  the  func- 
tion of  his  consciousness.  We  must  first  of  all  become  aware  of  our 
own  consciousness,  and  then  either  begin  a  conversation  (by  signs, 
gestures,  words)  with  another  man,  begin  to  exchange  thoughts 
with  him,  and  from  his  answers  deduce  the  conclusion  that  he 
possesses  consciousness — or  come  to  the  conclusion  about  it  from 
external  indications  (actions  similar  to  ours  in  similar  circum- 
stances) .  By  the  direct  method  of  objective  investigation,  without 
the  help  of  speech,  or  without  the  help  of  conclusions  based  upon 
analogy,  we  shall  not  discover   consciousness  in   another   man. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  183 

That  which  is  inaccessible  to  the  direct  method  of  investigation, 
but  exists,  is  noumenal.  Consequently  we  shall  not  be  in  a  posi- 
tion to  define  the  functions  and  meanings  of  man  in  another  sec- 
tion of  the  world  than  that  world  of  Euclidian  geometry,  solely 
accessible  to  the  "direct  methods  of  investigation."  Therefore  we 
have  a  perfect  right  to  regard  "the  consciousness  of  man"  as  his 
function  in  some  section  of  the  world  different  from  that  three- 
dimensional  section  wherein  "the  body  of  man"  functions. 

Having  established  this  much  we  may  ask  ourselves  the  ques- 
tion: have  we  not  the  right  to  make  a  reverse  conclusion,  and 
regard  as  their  consciousness  the  to  us  unknown  function  of  the 
"  world"  and  of  "  things"  outside  of  their  three-dimensional  section. 


Our  usual  positivistic  view  regards  consciousness  as  a  function 
of  the  brain.    Without  a  brain  we  cannot  imagine  consciousness. 

Max  Nordau,  when  he  wanted  to  imagine  the  world's  conscious- 
ness (in  "Paradoxes")  was  obliged  to  say  that  we  cannot  be  cer- 
tain that  somewhere  in  the  infinite  space  of  the  universe  is  not  re- 
peated on  a  grandiose  scale  the  same  combination  of  physical 
and  chemical  elements  as  constitutes  our  brains.  This  is  very 
characteristic  and  typical  of  "positive  science."  Desiring  to 
imagine  the  "world's  consciousness"  positivism  is  first  of  all 
forced  to  imagine  a  gigantic  brain.  Does  not  this  at  once  savor  of 
the  two-dimensional  or  plane  world?  Surely  the  idea  of  a  gigantic 
brain  somewhere  beyond  the  stars  reveals  the  appalling  poverty 
and  impotence  of  positivistic  thought.  This  thought  cannot  leave 
its  usual  grooves;  it  has  no  wings  for  a  soaring  flight. 

Let  us  imagine  that  some  curious  inhabitant  of  Europe  in  the 
seventeenth  century  should  try  to  foresee  the  means  of  transpor- 
tation in  the  twentieth  century,  and  should  picture  to  himself  an 
enormous  stage  coach,  large  as  an  hotel,  harnessed  to  one  thousand 
horses;  he  would  be  pretty  near  to  the  truth,  but  ...  at  the  same 
time  infinitely  far  from  it.  And  yet  even  in  his  time  some  minds 
which  foresaw  along  correct  lines  already  existed :  already  the  idea 
of  the  steam  engine  had  been  broached  and  models  were  appearing. 

The  thought  expressed  by  Nordau  reminds  one  of  a  favorite 
concept  of  popular  philosophy,  that  the  planets  and  satellites  of 
the  solar  system  are  merely  molecules  of  some  tremendous  organ- 
ism, an  insignificant  part  of  which  that  system  represents. 


184  TERTIUM  OKGANUM 

"Perhaps  the  entire  universe  is  located  on  the  tip  of  the  little 
finger  of  some  great  being",  says  such  a  philosophizer,  "and  per- 
haps our  molecules  are  also  worlds".  The  deuce!  "Perhaps  on 
my  little  finger  there  are  several  universes  too!"  And  such  a 
philosophizer  gets  frightened.  But  all  such  reasonings  are  merely 
the  gigantic  stage-coach  over  again.  This  is  the  way  a  little  girl 
thought,  about  whom  I  was  reading,  if  I  mistake  not,  in  "The 
Theosophical  Review."  The  girl  was  sitting  near  the  fireplace, 
and  beside  her  slept  a  cat.  "Well,  the  cat  is  sleeping",  the  girl 
reflected,  "perhaps  she  sees  in  a  dream  that  she  is  not  a  cat,  but 
a  little  girl.  And  maybe  /  am  not  a  little  girl  at  all,  but  a  cat,  and 
only  see  in  a  dream  that  I  am  a  little  girl.  .  "  The  next  moment 
the  house  resounds  with  a  violent  cry,  and  the  parents  of  the  little 
girl  have  a  hard  time  to  convince  her  that  she  is  not  a  cat  but 
really  a  little  girl. 

All  this  shows  that  it  is  necessary  to  philosophize  with  a  certain 
amount  of  skill.  Our  thought  is  encompassed  by  many  blind 
alleys,  and  positivism  in  itself  is  such  a  blind  alley. 


Our  analysis  of  phenomena,  the  relation  which  we  have  shown 
to  exist  between  physical  phenomena  and  those  of  life  and  of  con- 
sciousness, permits  us  to  assert  quite  definitely  that  the  phenomena 
of  consciousness  cannot  be  a  function  of  the  brain,  i.  е.,  a  function 
of  physiological  and  physical  phenomena — or  phenomena  of  a 
lower  order.  We  established  that  the  higher  cannot  be  a  function 
of  the  lower.  And  this  division  into  higher  and  lower  is  also  based 
upon  the  clear  fact  of  the  different  potentialities  of  various  orders 
of  phenomena — of  the  different  amount  of  latent  force  contained  in 
them  (or  liberated  by  them).  And  of  course  we  have  the  right  to 
call  those  phenomena  the  higher  which  possess  immeasurably 
greater  potentiality,  immeasurably  more  latent  force;  and  to  call 
those  the  lower  which  possess  less  potentiality,  less  latent  force. 

The  phenomena  of  life  are  the  higher  in  comparison  with  phy- 
sical phenomena. 

The  phenomena  of  consciousness  are  the  higher,  in  comparison 
with  the  phenomena  of  life  and  physical  phenomena. 

Which  must  be  the  function  of  which  is  clear. 

Without  making  a  palpable  logical  mistake  we  cannot  declare 
life  and  consciousness  to  be  dependent  functionally  upon  physical 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  185 

phenomena,  i.  е.,  to  be  a  result  of  physical  phenomena.  The  truth 
is  quite  the  opposite  of  this:  everything  forces  us  to  recognize 
physical  phenomena  as  the  result  of  life,  and  life  as  the  result  of 
consciousness. 

But  of  which  life,  and  of  which  consciousness?  Here  lies  the 
question.  Of  course  it  would  be  absurd  to  regard  our  planetary 
sphere  as  a  function  of  the  vegetable  and  animal  life  proceeding 
upon  it — and  the  visible  stellar  universe  as  a  function  of  human 
consciousness.  But  nothing  of  this  sort  is  meant.  In  the  occult 
understanding  of  things  we  speak  always  of  another  life  and 
another  consciousness,  the  particular  manifestation  of  which  is  our 
life  and  our  consciousness.  It  is  important  to  establish  the  general 
principle  that  physical  phenomena,  being  the  lower,  depend 
upon  the  phenomena  of  life  and  of  consciousness,  which  are 
higher. 

If  we  admit  this  principle  as  established,  then  it  is  possible  to 
proceed  further. 

The  first  question  which  arises  is  this:  In  what  relation  does 
the  consciousness  of  man  stand  to  his  body  and  his  brain? 

This  question  has  been  answered  differently  in  different  times. 
Consciousness  has  been  regarded  as  a  direct  function  of  the  brain 
("  Thought  is  the  motion  of  brain  substance"),  thus  of  course  deny- 
ing any  possibility  of  consciousness  without  the  existence  of  a 
brain.  Then  followed  an  attempt  to  establish  a  parallelism  be- 
tween the  activity  of  consciousness  and  of  the  brain.  But  the 
nature  of  this  parallelism  has  always  remained  obscure.  Yes, 
evidently,  the  brain  works  parallel  to  consciousness :  an  arrestment 
or  a  disorder  of  the  activity  of  the  brain  brings  as  a  consequence 
a  visible  arrestment  or  disorder  of  the  activity  of  consciousness. 
But  after  all,  the  activity  of  the  brain  is  merely  motion,  i.  е.,  an 
objective  phenomenon,  whereas  the  activity  of  consciousness  is  a 
phenomenon  objectively  undefinable:  subjective,  and  at  the 
same  time  more  powerful  than  anything  objective.  How  shall  we 
reconcile  all  this? 

Let  us  endeavor  to  consider  the  activity  of  the  brain  and  the 
activity  of  consciousness  from  the  standpoint  of  the  existence  of 
those  two  data,  the  "world"  and  "consciousness,"  accepted  by  us 
at  the  very  beginning. 

If  we  consider  the  brain  from  the  standpoint  of  consciousness, 
then  the  brain  will  be  part  of  the  "world,"  i.  е.,  part  of  the  outer 


186  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

world  lying  outside  of  consciousness.  Therefore  consciousness 
and  brain  are  different  things.  But  consciousness,  as  experience 
and  observation  shows,  can  act  only  through  the  brain.  The  brain 
is  that  necessary  prism,  passing  through  which,  consciousness 
manifests  itself  to  us  as  intellect.  Or  to  put  it  a  little  differently, 
the  brain  is  a  mirror,  reflecting  consciousness  in  our  three-dimen- 
sional section  of  the  world.  This  last  means  that  in  our  three- 
dimensional  section  of  the  world  not  all  of  consciousness  (the  true 
dimensions  of  which  we  do  not  know)  is  acting,  but  only  so  much 
of  it  as  can  be  reflected  in  a  brain.  It  is  clear  that  if  the  mirror 
be  broken,  then  the  image  will  be  broken  too,  or  if  the  mirror  be 
injured  or  imperfect,  then  the  reflection  will  be  blurred  or  dis- 
torted. But  there  is  absolutely  no  reason  to  believe  that  when 
the  mirror  is  broken  the  object  which  it  reflects  is  thereby  destroy- 
ed, i.  е.,  in  the  given  case,  consciousness. 

Consciousness  cannot  suffer  from  any  disorder  of  the  brain,  but 
the  manifestations  of  it  may  suffer  very  much  or  may  even  dis- 
appear from  the  field  of  our  observation  altogether.  Therefore 
it  is  clear  that  a  disorder  in  the  activity  of  the  brain  causes  an 
enfeeblement  or  a  distortion,  or  even  a  complete  disappearance  of 
the  faculties  of  consciousness  manifesting  in  our  sphere. 

The  idea  of  the  comparison  between  a  three-dimensional  body 
and  a  four-dimensional  one  enables  us  to  affirm  that  not  all  the 
activity  of  consciousness  goes  through  the  brain,  but  a  part  of  it 
only.  The  brain  is  clearly  a  three-dimensional  body,  and  as  such, 
unreal.  Consciousness  is  something  having  no  dimensions  or 
many — real  in  any  case.  So  how  can  the  real  disappear  with  the 
destruction  of  the  unreal. 

Each  of  us  is  in  reality  an  abiding  psychical  entity  far  more  extensive 
than  he  knows — an  individuality  which  can  never  express  itself  com- 
pletely through  any  corporeal  manifestation.  The  self  manifests 
through  the  organism ;  but  there  is  always  some  part  of  the  self  unmani- 
fested.* 


The  "positivist"  will  remain  unconvinced.  He  will  say:  prove 
to  me  that  consciousness  can  act  without  a  brain,  then  I  will 
believe  it. 

I  shall  answer  him  by  the  question:  what,  in  the  given  case, 
will  constitute  a  proof? 

♦Frederic  Myers,  "Essay  on  the  Subliminal  Consciousness"  as  quoted  in  William  James'  "The 
Varieties  of  Religious  Experience,"  Longmans,  Green  &  Co.,  New  York,  p.  512. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  187 

There  are  no  proofs  and  there  cannot  be  any.  The  existence  of 
consciousness  without  a  brain,  if  that  be  possible,  is  for  us  a  meta- 
physical fact,  which  cannot  be  proven,  like  a  physical  one. 

And  if  my  opponent  will  reason  sincerely,  then  he  will  be  con- 
vinced there  can  be  no  proof,  because  he  himself  has  no  means  of 
being  convinced  of  the  existence  of  consciousness  acting  independent 
of  a  brain.  Let  us  assume  that  the  consciousness  of  a  dead  man 
(i.  е.,  of  a  man  whose  brain  has  ceased  to  act)  continues  to  func- 
tion. How  can  we  convince  ourselves  of  this?  By  no  possible 
means  whatever.  We  have  means  of  communication  (speech, 
writing)  with  consciousnesses  which  are  in  conditions  similar  to 
our  own — i.  е.,  acting  through  brains;  concerning  the  existence  of 
those  same  consciousnesses  we  can  conclude  by  analogy  with  our- 
selves; but  concerning  the  existence  of  other  consciousnesses, 
whether  they  do  or  they  do  not  exist  is  immaterial,  there  are  no  means 
whereby  we  can  convince  ourselves  that  they  exist. 

It  is  exactly  this  last  that  gives  us  a  key  to  the  understanding 
of  the  true  relation  of  consciousness  to  the  brain.  Our  conscious- 
ness being  the  reflection  of  consciousness  from  the  brain,  we  can 
observe,  as  consciousness  only  those  reflections  which  are  sim- 
ilar to  itself.  We  have  before  established  that  we  can  make  con- 
clusions concerning  consciousnesses  other  than  our  own  from  the 
exchange  of  thoughts  with  them  and  from  analogies  with  ourselves. 
Now  we  may  add  to  this,  that  for  this  very  reason  we  can  know 
only  about  the  existence  of  consciousnesses  similar  to  our  own,  and 
we  cannot  know  any  other  consciousnesses  at  all,  whether  they 
exist  or  not,  unless  we  ourselves  enter  their  plane. 

Should  we  ever  realize  our  consciousness,  not  only  as  it  is  re- 
flected from  a  brain,  but  in  a  condition  more  universal,  simultane- 
ously with  this  the  possibility  would  open  up  of  discovering  con- 
sciousnesses analogical  to  ours  which  are  not  reflected  from  a 
brain,  if  such  exist  in  nature. 

But  do  such  consciousnesses  exist  or  not?  How  can  we  gain  in- 
formation on  this  point  with  our  consciousness  such  as  it  is  now? 

Observing  the  world  from  our  standpoint,  we  perceive  in  it 
actions  proceeding  from  rational  conscious  causes,  such  as  the 
work  of  a  man;  and  other  actions  proceeding  from  the  uncon- 
scious blind  forces  of  nature,  such  as  the  movement  of  waves,  the 
ebbing  and  flowing  of  the  tide,  the  descent  of  great  rivers,  etc., 
etc. 


188  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

In  such  a  division  of  observed  actions  into  rational  and  un- 
reasoned, there  is  something  naive,  even  from  the  positivistic 
standpoint.  For  if  we  have  learned  anything  from  the  study  of 
nature,  if  the  positivistic  method  has  given  us  anything  at  all, 
then  it  is  the  assurance  of  the  necessity  for  the  uniformity  of  phe- 
nomena. We  know,  and  with  great  certainty,  that  things  basically 
similar  cannot  proceed  from  dissimilar  causes.  Positive  philoso- 
phy knows  this  too.  Therefore  it  also  regards  the  foregoing  divi- 
sion as  naive,  and  conscious  of  the  impossibility  of  such  dualism — 
that  one  part  of  observed  phenomena  proceed  from  rational  and 
conscious  causes  and  another  part  from  unreasoned  and  uncon- 
scious ones — positivistic  philosophy  strives  to  explain  everything 
as  proceeding  from  causes  which  are  irrational  and  unconscious. 

Positivistic  philosophy  holds  that  the  seeming  rationality  of 
human  actions  is  a  miserable  illusion  and  a  self -consolation.  Man 
is  a  toy  in  the  hands  of  elemental  forces.  He  is  merely  a  trans- 
forming station  of  forces.  All  that  which  as  it  seems  to  him,  he 
is  doing,  is  in  reality  done  instead  by  external  forces  which  enter 
him  through  air,  food,  sunlight.  Man  does  not  perform  a  single 
action  by  himself.  He  is  merely  a  prism  in  which  a  line  of  action 
is  refracted  in  a  certain  manner.  But  just  as  the  beam  of  light 
does  not  proceed  from  the  prism,  so  action  does  not  proceed  from 
the  reason  of  man. 

The  famous  "theoretical  experiment"  of  certain  German 
psycho-physiologists  is  usually  advanced  in  confirmation  of  this. 
They  affirmed  that  if  it  were  possible,  from  the  time  of  his  birth,  to 
deprive  a  man  of  all  external  imphessions  :  light,  sound,  touch, 
heat,  cold,  etc.,  and  at  the  same  time  preserve  him  alive,  then 
such  a  man  would  not  be  able  to  perform  even  the  most  insig- 
nificant action. 

From  this  it  follows  that  man  is  an  automaton,  like  that  auto- 
maton projected  by  the  American  inventor  Tesla,  which,  obeying 
electric  currents  and  vibrations  coming  from  a  great  distance 
without  wires,  was  calculated  to  execute  a  whole  series  of  com- 
plicated movements. 

It  follows  from  this  that  all  the  actions  of  a  man  depend  upon 
outer  impulses.  For  the  smallest  reflex,  outer  irration  is  necessary. 
For  more  complex  action  a  whole  series  of  preceding  complex  irra- 
tions  is  necessary.  Sometimes  between  the  irritation  and  the 
action  a  considerable  time  elapses,  and  a  man  does  not  feel  any 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  189 

connection  between  the  two.  Therefore  he  regards  his  actions  as 
voluntary,  though  in  reality  there  are  no  voluntary  actions  at  all — 
man  cannot  do  anything  by  himself,  just  as  a  stone  cannot  jump 
voluntarily:  it  is  necessary  that  something  should  throw  it  up. 
Man  needs  something  to  give  him  an  impulse,  and  then  he  will 
develop  exactly  so  much  force  as  such  an  impulse  (and  all  pre- 
ceding impulses)  put  into  him  and  no  trifle  more.  Such  is  the 
teaching  of  positivism. 

From  the  standpoint  of  logic  such  a  theory  is  more  correct 
than  that  theory  of  two  classes  of  actions — reasoned  and  un- 
reasoned. It  at  least  establishes  the  principle  of  necessary 
uniformity.  It  is  really  impossible  to  suppose  that  in  an  im- 
mense machine  certain  parts  move  according  to  their  own  desire 
and  reasoning,  there  must  be  something  uniform — either  all  parts 
of  the  machine  possess  a  consciousness  of  their  function  and  act 
according  to  this  consciousness,  or  all  are  worked  from  one  motor 
and  are  driven  by  one  transmission.  The  enormous  service  per- 
formed by  positivism  is  that  it  established  this  principle  of 
uniformity.  It  is  left  to  us  to  define  in  what  this  uniformity 
consists. 

The  positivistic  hypothesis  of  the  world  considers  that  the  basis 
of  everything  is  unconscious  energy,  which  arose  from  unknown 
causes  at  a  time  that  is  not  known.  This  energy,  after  it  has 
passed  through  a  whole  series  of  invisible  electro-magnetic  and 
physico-chemical  processes,  is  expressed  for  us  in  visible  and 
sensed  motion,  then  in  growth,  i.  е.,  in  the  phenomena  of  life,  and 
at  last  in  consciousness. 

This  view  has  been  already  investigated  and  the  conclusion 
reached  that  it  is  impossible  to  regard  physical  phenomena  as  the 
cause  of  the  phenomena  of  consciousness,  while  on  the  other 
hand,  the  phenomena  of  consciousness  serve  as  an  undoubted 
cause  for  a  great  number  of  the  physical  phenomena  observed  by 
us.  Then,  from  the  very  essence  of  the  idea  of  motion — which  is 
the  foundation  of  the  physico-mechanical  world — was  deduced 
the  conclusion  that  motion  is  not  an  entirely  obvious  thing,  that 
the  idea  of  motion  arose  in  us  because  of  the  limitation  and  in- 
completeness of  our  sense  of  space  (a  slit  through  which  we  ob- 
serve the  world).  And  it  was  established,  not  that  the  idea  of 
time  is  deduced  from  the  observation  of  motion,  but  that  the 
idea  of  motion  results  from  our  "time-sense" — and  that  the  idea 


190  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

of  motion  is  quite  definitely  the  function  of  the  "time-sense"  which 
in  itself  is  a  limit  or  boundary  of  the  space  sense  belonging  to  a 
being  of  a  given  psyche.  It  was  also  established  that  the  idea  of 
motion  could  arise  out  of  a  comparison  between  two  different 
fields  of  consciousness.  And  in  general,  all  analysis  of  the  funda- 
mental categories  of  our  knowledge  of  the  world — space  and  time — 
showed  that  we  have  absolutely  no  data  whatever  for  accepting 
motion  as  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  world. 

And  if  this  is  so — if  it  is  impossible  to  assume  behind  the 
scenes  of  the  creation  of  the  world  the  presence  of  an  unconscious 
mechanical  motor — then  it  is  necessary  to  consider  the  cosmos  as 
living  and  conscious.  Because  one  or  the  other  of  two  things  must 
be  true:  either  it  is  mechanical  and  dead — "accidental" — or  it  is 
living  and  conscious  of  itself.  There  can  be  nothing  dead  in  living 
nature  and  there  can  be  nothing  living  in  dead  nature. 

Nature  exhibits  a  continual  progress,  starting  from  the  mechanical 
and  chemical  activity  of  the  inorganic  world,  proceeding  to  the  vegetable, 
with  its  dull  enjoyment  of  self,  from  that  to  the  animal  world,  where  in- 
telligence and  consciousness  began  at  first  very  weak,  and  only  after 
many  intermediate  stages  attaining  its  last  great  development  in  man, 
whose  intellect  is  nature's  crowning  point,  the  goal  of  all  her  efforts,  the 
most  perfect  and  difficult  of  all  her  works. 

So  writes  Schopenhauer  in  his  "Counsels  and  Maxims,"  and 
indeed  it  is  very  effectively  expressed,  but  we  have  no  foundation 
whatsoever  for  regarding  man  as  the  summit  of  that  which  nature 
has  created.    This  is  only  the  highest  that  we  know. 

Schopenhauer's  thought  is  doubtless  very  beautiful,  but  never- 
theless it  is  necessary  to  admit  that  in  nature  conscious  and  un- 
conscious cannot  exist  together.  There  must  be  something  which 
is  one. 

Positivism  would  be  absolutely  correct  in  its  picture  of  the 
world,  there  would  not  be  even  the  smallest  deficiency,  if  there 
were  no  consciousness  in  the  world.  Then  it  would  be  necessary, 
nolens  volens,  to  regard  the  universe  as  an  accidentally  self-created 
mechanical  toy  in  space  and  nothing  more.  But  the  fact  of  the 
existence  of  consciousness  "spoils  all  the  statistics."  It  is  impossible 
to  exclude  it. 

We  are  either  forced  to  admit  the  existence  of  two  principles — 
consciousness  and  motion,  "spirit"  and  "matter" — or  to  select 
one  of  them. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  191 

Then  dualism  annihilates  itself,  because  if  we  admit  the  separate 
existence  of  spirit  and  matter,  and  reason  further  on  this  basis,  it 
will  be  inevitably  necessary  to  conclude,  either  that  spirit  is  unreal 
and  matter  real;  or  that  matter  is  unreal  and  spirit  real — i.  е., 
either  that  spirit  is  material  or  that  matter  is  spiritual.  Conse- 
quently it  is  necessary  to  select  some  one  thing — spirit  or  matter. 

But  to  think  really  monistically  is  considerably  more  difficult 
than  it  seems.  I  have  met  many  men  who  have  called  themselves 
"monists,"  and  sincerely  considered  themselves  as  such,  but  in 
reality  they  never  departed  from  the  most  naive  dualism,  and  no 
spark  of  understanding  of  the  world's  unity  ever  flashed  upon 
them. 

Materialism,  regarded  as  the  basis  of  everything,  "motion,"  or 
"energy,"  can  never  be  "monistic."  It  is  not  possible  to  anni- 
hilate consciousness.  This  is  unfortunate  for  materialism.  If  it 
were  able  to  annihilate  consciousness  completely,  then  everything 
would  be  splendid,  and  the  universe  could  be  something  like  an 
accidentally  self-created  mechanical  toy.  But  to  its  sorrow,  ma- 
terialism cannot  deny  consciousness.  It  can  only  try  to  degrade 
it  as  low  as  possible,  calling  it  the  reflection  of  reality,  the  sub- 
stance of  which  consists  of  motion. 

But  how  deal  with  the  fact  that  the  "reflection"  possesses  in  this 
case  an  infinitely  greater  potentiality  than  the  "reality"?  How 
can  this  be?  From  what  does  this  reality  reflect,  or  what  is  it  re- 
fracted in,  that  in  its  reflected  state  it  possesses  infinitely  greater 
potentiality  than  in  its  original  state? 

The  consistent  "  materialist-monist"  will  be  forced  to  say  that 
"reality"  reflects  from  itself,  i.  е.,  "one  motion"  reflects  from 
another  motion.  But  this  is  merely  dialectics,  and  fails  to  make 
clear  the  nature  of  consciousness,  for  consciousness  is  something 
other  than  motion. 


No  matter  how  hard  we  may  try  to  define  consciousness  in  terms 
of  motion,  we  nevertheless  know  that  they  are  two  different  things, 
different  as  regards  our  receptivity  of  them,  belonging  to  different 
worlds,  incommensurable,  and  which  can  exist  simultaneously. 
Moreover,  consciousness  can  exist  without  motion,  but  motion 
cannot  exist  without  consciousness,  because  out  of  consciousness 
comes  the  necessary  condition  of  motion — time.  No  conscious- 
ness— no  time:  no  time — no  motion. 


192  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

We  cannot  escape  this  fact,  and  thinking  logically,  we  must  inev- 
itably recognize  two  principles.  But  if  we  begin  to  consider  the 
very  recognition  of  two  principles  as  illogical,  then  we  must  recog- 
nize consciousness  as  a  single  principle,  and  motion  as  an  illu- 
sion OF   CONSCIOUSNESS. 

But  what  does  this  mean?  It  means  that  there  can  be  no 
"monistic  materialism."  Materialism  can  be  only  dualistic,  i.  е., 
it  must  recognize  two  principles:  motion  and  consciousness.  As 
soon  as  it  comes  to  recognize  one  principle  it  becomes  idealism, 
metaphysics. 

But  in  order  to  think  idealistically  it  is  necessary  that  idealism 
be  not  dualistic.  Because  just  as  "monistic  materialism"  is  im- 
possible, so  is  "dualistic  idealism"  equally  impossible. 

But  in  order  to  come  to  pure  and  strict  monistic  idealism  a  pro- 
found and  fundamental  reconstruction  of  all  our  concepts  is  neces- 
sary.   Here  a  new  difficulty  arises. 

Our  concepts  are  limited  by  language.  Our  language  is  deeply 
dualistic.  This  is  indeed  a  terrible  obstacle.  I  showed  previously 
how  language  retards  our  thought,  making  it  impossible  to  ex- 
press the  relations  of  a  being  universe.  In  our  language  only  an 
eternally  becoming  universe  exists.  The  "Eternal  Now"  cannot 
be  expressed  in  language. 

Thus  our  language  pictures  to  us  beforehand  a  false  universe— 
dual,  when  in  reality  it  is  one;  and  eternally  becoming  when  is  it  in 
reality  eternally  being. 

And  if  we  come  to  realize  the  degree  to  which  our  language 
falsifies  the  real  view  of  the  world,  then  the  understanding  of 
this  fact  will  enable  us  to  see  that  it  is  not  only  difficult,  but  even 
absolutely  impossible  to  express  in  language  the  correct  relation  of 
the  things  of  the  real  world. 

This  difficulty  can  be  conquered  only  by  the  formation  of  new 
concepts  and  by  extended  analogies. 

Later  on  the  principles  and  methods  of  this  expansion  of  what 
we  already  have,  and  what  we  can  extract  from  our  stores  of 
knowledge  will  be  made  clear.  For  the  present  it  is  only  im- 
portant to  establish  one  thing— the  necessity  for  uniformity: 
the  monism  of  the  universe. 

As  a  matter  of  principle  it  is  not  important  which  one  we  regard 
as  first  cause,  spirit  or  matter.  It  is  essential  to  recognize  their 
unity. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  193 

But  it  has  been  shown  before  that  the  materialistic  conception 
of  the  universe  leads  to  considerable  inconveniences.  These  in- 
conveniences generally  consist  in  the  fact  that  regarding  the 
spiritual  world  as  material,  man  at  the  same  time  imagines  it  as 
three-dimensional.  And  the  three-dimensional  conception  of 
the  spiritual  world — in  various  spiritistic  and  theosophical  theories 
— this  is  clearly  an  absurdity,  and  leads  in  turn  to  other  absurdities. 

Therefore  in  the  interest  of  correct  thinking,  it  is  necessary 
once  for  all  to  recognize  spirit,  i.  е.,  consciousness  as  the  first  cause. 
This  will  prevent  many  unnecessary  wanderings  in  roundabout 
paths  and  blind  alleys.  For  if  we  recognize  the  existence  of  con- 
sciousness in  general,  then  it  is  necessary  to  recognize  that  there 
exists  only  one  consciousness  and  nothing  else. 


But  the  positivist  will  ask :  what  then  is  matter? 

From  one  point  of  view,  it  is  a  logical  concept,  i.  е.,  a  form  of 
thinking — I  shall  answer.  Nobody  ever  saw  matter,  nor  will  they 
ever — it  is  possible  only  to  think  matter.  From  another  point  of 
view  it  is  an  illusion  accepted  for  reality. 

Even  more  truly,  it  is  the  incorrectly  perceived  form  of  that 
which  exists  in  reality.  Matter  is  a  section  of  something:  a  non- 
existent, imaginary  section.  But  that  of  which  matter  is  a  section, 
exists.     This  is  the  real,  four-dimensional  world. 

But  this  wood,  the  substance  from  which  this  table  is  made — 
does  it  exist? 

It  exists,  but  the  true  nature  of  its  existence  we  do  not  know. 
All  that  we  know  about  it  is  just  the  form  of  our  receptivity  of  it. 

But  if  we  ceased  to  exist,  would  it  continue  to  exist? 

Yes,  for  consciousnesses  working  in  conditions  of  receptivity 
analogous  to  ours,  it  will  exist  in  the  same  forms  as  for  us.  But 
in  itself  this  substance  exists  in  some  other  way — how,  we  do  not 
know.  Certainly  not  in  space  and  time,  for  we  ourselves  impose 
these  forms  upon  it.  Probably  all  similar  wood,  of  different  cen- 
turies, and  different  parts  of  the  world,  constitutes  one  mass — one 
body — perhaps  one  being.  Certainly  that  substance  (or  that  part 
of  it)  of  which  this  table  is  made,  has  no  separate  existence  apart 
from  our  receptivity.  We  fail  to  understand  that  a  particular 
thing  is  merely  an  artificial  definition  by  our  senses,  of  some  inde- 
finable cause  infinitely  surpassing  that  thing. 


194  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

But  a  thing  may  acquire  its  own  individual  and  unique  soul; 
and  in  that  case  the  thing  exists  quite  independently  of  our  re- 
ceptivity. Many  things  possess  such  souls,  especially  old  things — 
old  houses,  old  books,  works  of  art,  etc. 


We  may  consider  the  fact  as  established  that  we  cannot  know 
of  the  existence  of  another  consciousness  directly,  except  through 
communication  with  it  by  speech,  or  by  conclusions  based  upon 
analogy. 

But  what  ground  have  we  for  thinking  that  there  are  con- 
sciousnesses in  the  world  other  than  our  human  ones,  the  limited 
consciousnesses  of  animals  and  the  semi-consciousness  of  plants? 

First  of  all,  the  circumstance  that  if  such  consciousnesses  exist 
we,  with  our  means,  could  not  know  anything  about  them.  Of 
course  this  is  no  proof  of  their  existence,  but  it  explains  why  we  do 
not  know  of  them  if  they  exist;  also,  the  circumstance  that  we 
know  of  the  existence  of  consciousnesses  only  in  our  section  of  the 
world  and  below  (men,  animals,  plants).  Indeed  we  have  no 
reason  whatever  to  think  that  in  a  higher  section  of  the  world, 
i.  е.,  in  four-dimensional  space,  there  are  no  consciousnesses.  On 
the  contrary,  everything  logically  points  to  the  conclusion  that 
they  must  exist  and  must  be  more  powerful  than  ours. 

And  last  of  all  of  these  considerations,  we  know  that  the  world 
is  consciousness,  that  everything  in  it  is  conscious,  and  in  general 
there  is  nothing  unconscious  in  it,  nor  can  there  be.  But  when  all 
is  said,  the  most  important  thing  is  that  we  can  have  no  reason  to 
regard  our  consciousness  as  unique,  and  the  highest  form  of  con- 
sciousness in  the  universe. 

The  question  now  stands  in  this  way :  how  could  we  know  about 
the  existence  of  the  consciousnesses  of  other  sections  of  the 
world — of  higher  space — if  they  exist. 

By  two  methods:  through  communication  with  them,  and 

through  CONCLUSIONS  BY  ANALOGY. 

For  the  first,  it  is  necessary  that  our  consciousness  should  be- 
come similar  to  theirs,  should  transcend  the  limits  of  the  three- 
dimensional  world,  i.  е.,  it  is  necessary  to  change  the  form  of  con- 
sciousness. 

The  second  may  result  as  a  consequence  of  the  gradual  expan- 
sion of  the  faculty  of  drawing  inferences  by  analogy.    By  trying 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  195 

to  think  out  of  the  usual  categories,  by  trying  to  look  at  things 
and  at  ourselves  in  a  new  light,  by  trying  to  liberate  our  conscious- 
ness from  its  accustomed  chains  of  perception  in  space  and  time, 
little  by  little  we  begin  to  notice  analogies  between  things  which 
we  did  not  notice  before.  Our  mind  grows,  and  with  it  grows  the 
power  to  discover  analogies.  This  ability,  with  each  new  step 
attained,  expands  and  enriches  the  mind.  Each  minute  we  ad- 
vance more  rapidly,  each  new  step  makes  the  next  more  easy. 
Our  consciousness  becomes  different.  Then,  applying  to  itself  its 
expanded  ability  to  construct  analogies,  and  looking  about,  con- 
sciousness suddenly  perceives  round  about  itself  a  series  of  con- 
sciousnesses of  the  existence  of  which  it  was  previously  unaware. 
And  our  consciousness  understands  the  reason  for  this  unaware- 
ness:  these  consciousnesses  belong  to  another  plane,  and  not  to 
that  to  which  our  consciousness  is  native.  Thus  in  this  case, 
simply  the  ability  to  discover  new  analogies  translates  our  con- 
sciousness into  another  plane  of  existence. 

The  consciousness  of  a  man  begins  to  penetrate  into  the  world 
of  noumena,  which  is  in  affinity  with  it.  Then  his  point  of 
view  changes  likewise  with  regard  to  the  things  and  events  of  the 
'phenomenal  world.  Phenomena  may  suddenly  assume,  to  his  eyes, 
quite  different  grouping.  As  already  said,  similar  things  may  be 
different  from  one  another  in  reality,  different  things  may  be 
similar;  quite  separate,  disconnected  things  may  be  part  of  one 
great  whole,  of  some  entirely  new  category;  and  things  which  appear 
inextricably  united  into  one,  constituting  one  whole  may  in  reality 
be  manifestations  of  different  consciousnesses  having  nothing  in 
common  among  themselves,  even  knowing  nothing  whatever  about 
the  existence  of  one  another.  Such  indeed  may  be  any  whole  of 
our  world — man,  animal,  planet,  planetary  system — i.  е.,  con- 
sisting of  different  consciousnesses,  a  battle-field  as  it  were  of 
warring  consciousnesses. 

In  each  whole  of  our  world  we  perceive  a  multitude  of  opposing 
tendencies,  aspirations,  efforts.  Each  aggregate  is  as  it  were  an 
arena  of  struggle  for  multitudes  of  opposing  forces,  each  of  which 
acts  by  itself,  is  directed  to  its  own  goal,  usually  to  the  disruption 
of  the  whole.  But  the  interaction  of  these  forces  represents  the 
life  of  the  whole;  and  in  everything  something  is  always  acting 
which  limits  the  activity  of  separate  tendencies.  This  something 
is  the  consciousness  of  the  whole.     We  cannot  establish  the  ex- 


196  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

istence  of  such  a  consciousness  by  analogy  with  ourselves,  or  by 
intercourse  with  it,  or  by  exchange  of  thoughts,  but  a  new  path 
opens  before  us.  We  perceive  a  certain  separate  and  quite 
definite  function  (the  preservation  of  the  whole).  Behind  this 
function  we  infer  a  certain  separate  something.  A  separate  some- 
thing having  a  definite  function  is  impossible  without  conscious- 
ness. If  the  whole  possesses  consciousness,  then  the  separate 
tendencies  or  forces  must  also  possess  consciousness.  A  body  or 
organism  is  the  point  of  intersection  of  the  lines  of  these  conscious- 
nesses, a  place  of  meeting,  perhaps  a  battle-field.  Our  "I"  is  also 
that  battle-field  on  which  this  or  that  emotion,  this  or  that  habit 
or  inclination,  gains  an  advantage,  subjecting  to  itself  all  of  the 
rest  at  every  given  moment,  and  identifying  itself  with  the  I. 
But  also  the  I  is  a  being,  having  its  own  life,  imperfectly  conscious 
of  that  of  which  it  itself  consists,  and  identifying  itself  with  this 
or  another  portion  of  itself.  Have  we  any  warrant  for  supposing 
that  the  organs  and  members  of  a  body,  thoughts  and  emotions,  are 
beings  also?  We  have,  because  we  know  that  there  exists  nothing 
unconscious;  and  any  something,  having  a  separate  function,  must 
have  a  separate  consciousness  and  can  be  called  a  being. 

All  the  consciousnesses  assumed  by  us  to  exist  in  the  world  of 
many  dimensions,  cannot  know  one  another,  i.  е.,  cannot  know  that 
we  are  binding  them  together  in  different  wholes  in  our  phenom- 
enal world,  just  as  in  general  they  cannot  know  our  phenomenal 
world  and  its  relations.  But  they  must  be  conscious  of  themselves, 
although  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  define  the  degree  of  clearness  of 
this  consciousness.  It  may  be  clearer  than  ours,  and  it  may  be 
more  vague — dreamlike,  as  it  were.  Between  consciousnesses 
there  may  be  a  continuous  but  imperfectly  perceived  exchange  of 
thoughts,  analogous  to  the  exchange  of  substance  in  a  living  or- 
ganism. They  may  experience  certain  feelings  in  common,  certain 
thoughts  may  arise  in  them  spontaneously  as  it  were,  under  the 
influence  of  general  causes.  Upon  the  lines  of  this  inner  com- 
munion consciousnesses  must  divide  themselves  into  different 
wholes  of  some  categories  to  us  entirely  incomprehensible,  or  only 
guessed  at.  The  essence  of  each  such  separate  consciousness  must 
consist  in  its  knowledge  of  itself  and  its  nearest  functions  and  rela- 
tions; it  must  feel  things  analogous  to  itself,  and  must  have  the 
faculty  of  telling  about  itself  and  them,  i.  е.,  this  consciousness 
must  always  behold  a  picture  of  itself  and  its  conditioning  rela- 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  197 

tions.  It  is  eternally  studying  this  picture  and  instantly  communi- 
cating it  to  another  consciousness  coming  into  communion  with  it. 
Whether  these  consciousnesses  in  sections  of  the  world  other 
than  ours  exist  or  not,  we,  under  the  existing  conditions  of  our  re- 
ceptivity, cannot  say.  They  can  be  sensed  only  by  the  developed 
intuition,  i.  е.,  by  a  different  kind  of  consciousness.  Our  usual  con- 
sciousness is  too  absorbed  by  the  sensations  of  the  phenomenal 
world,  and  by  itself,  and  therefore  does  not  reflect  impressions 
coming  to  it  from  other  consciousnesses,  or  reflects  them  so  weakly 
that  they  are  not  fixed  there  in  any  intelligible  form.  Moreover 
our  consciousness  does  not  recognize  the  fact  that  it  is  in  constant 
communion  with  the  nouemna  of  all  surrounding  things,  near  and 
remote,  and  with  consciousnesses  like  it  and  those  entirely  differ- 
ent, with  the  consciousness  of  everything  in  the  world  and  of  all 
the  world.  But  if  the  impressions  coming  from  other  conscious- 
nesses are  so  forceful  that  the  consciousness  feels  them,  then  it 
immediately  projects  them  into  the  outer  world  of  phenomena 
and  seeks  for  their  cause  in  the  phenomenal  world,  exactly  in  the 
same  manner  that  a  two-dimensional  being,  inhabiting  a  plane, 
seeks  in  its  plane  for  the  causes  of  the  impressions  which  come 
from  a  higher  world.       

Our  consciousness  is  limited  by  its  phenomenal  receptivity, 
i.  е.,  it  is  surrounded  by  itself.  The  world  of  phenomena,  i.  е., 
the  form  of  its  own  perception,  surrounds  it  as  a  ring,  or  as  a  wall; 
and  the  ordinary  consciousness  sees  nothing  save  this  wall. 

But  if  consciousness  succeeds  in  escaping  out  of  this  limiting 
circle,  it  will  invariably  see  much  that  is  new  in  the  world. 

If  we  will  separate  self-elements  in  our  perception,  writes  Hinton  ("A 
New  Era  of  Thought"  p.  36,  37),  then  it  will  be  found  that  the  deadness 
which  we  ascribe  to  the  external  world  is  not  really  there,  but  is  put  in 
by  us  because  of  our  own  limitations.  It  is  really  the  self  elements  in  our 
knowledge  which  make  us  talk  of  mechanical  necessity,  dead  matter. 
When  our  limitations  fall,  we  behold  the  spirit  of  the  world  like  we  be- 
hold the  spirit  of  a  friend — something  which  is  discerned  in  and  through 
the  material  presentation  of  a  body  to  us. 

Our  thought  means  are  sufficient  at  present  to  show  us  human  souls;  but 
all  except  human  beings  is,  as  far  as  science  is  concerned,  inanimate.  One 
self  element  must  be  got  rid  of  from  our  perception,  and  this  will  be  changed. 

But  is  the  unknowableness  of  the  noumenal  world  as  absolute 
for  us  as  it  sometimes  seems? 


198  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

In  "The  Critique  of  Pure  Reason"  and  in  other  writings,  Kant 
denied  the  possibility  of  "spiritual  sight."  But  in  "Dreams  of 
a  Ghost-seer"  he  not  only  admitted  this  possibility,  but  gave  to 
it  one  of  the  best  definitions  which  we  have  ever  had  up  to  now. 
He  clearly  affirms : 

I  confess  that  I  am  very  much  inclined  to  assert  the  existence  of  im- 
material natures  in  the  world,  and  to  put  my  soul  itself  into  that  class 
of  beings.  These  immaterial  beings  ....  are  immediately  united 
with  each  other,  they  might  form,  perhaps,  a  great  whole  which  might 
be  called  the  immaterial  world.  Every  man  is  a  being  of  two  worlds:  of 
the  incorporeal  world  and  of  the  material  world  .  .  .  and  it  will  be  proved 
I  don't  know  where  or  when,  that  the  human  soul  also  in  this  life  forms 
an  indissoluble  communion  with  all  immaterial  natures  of  the  spirit- 
world,  that,  alternately,  it  acts  upon  and  receives  impressions  from  that 
world  of  which  nevertheless  it  is  not  conscious  while  it  is  still  man  and 
as  long  as  everything  is  in  proper  condition 

We  should,  therefore,  have  to  regard  the  human  soul  as  being  conjoined 
in  its  present  life  with  two  worlds  at  the  same  time,  of  which  it  clearly 
perceives  only  the  material  world,  in  so  far  as  it  is  conjoined  with  a  body, 
and  thus  forms  a  personal  unit.    .    .    . 

It  is  therefore,  indeed,  one  subject,  which  is  thus  at  the  same  time  a 
member  of  the  visible  and  of  the  invisible  world,  but  not  one  and  the 
same  person;  for  on  account  of  their  different  quality,  the  conceptions  of 
the  one  world  are  not  ideas  associated  with  those  of  the  other  world, 
thus,  what  I  think  as  a  spirit,  is  not  remembered  by  me  as  a  man,  and, 
conversely,  my  state  as  a  man  does  not  at  all  enter  into  the  conception 
of  myself  as  a  spirit. 

Birth,  life,  death  are  the  states  of  soul  only  .  .  .  .  Consequently, 
our  body  only  is  perishable,  the  essence  of  us  is  not  perishable,  and  must 
have  been  existent  during  that  time,  when  our  body  had  no  existence. 
The  life  of  the  man  is  dual.  It  consists  of  two  lives — one  animal  and 
one  spiritual.  The  first  life  is  the  life  of  man  and  man  needs  a  body  to 
live  this  life.  The  second  life  is  the  life  of  spirit;  his  soul  lives  in  that 
life  separately  from  the  body,  and  must  live  on  in  it  after  the  separation 
from  the  body. 

In  an  essay  on  Kant  in  "The  Northern  Messenger"  (1888, 
Russian),  A.  L.  Volinsky  says  that  both  in  Vorlesungen,  and  also 
in  "Dreams  of  a  Ghost-seer,"  Kant  denied  the  possibility  of  one 
thing  only — the  possibility  of  the  physical  receptivity  of  spiritual 
phenomena. 

Thus  Kant  admitted  not  only  the  possibility  of  the  existence  of 
a  spiritual  conscious  world,  but  also  the  possibility  of  communion 
with  it. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  199 

Hegel  built  all  his  philosophy  upon  the  possibility  of  a  direct 
knowledge  of  truth,  upon  spiritual  vision. 

Approaching  the  question  of  two  worlds  from  the  psychological 
standpoint,  from  the  standpoint  of  the  theory  of  knowledge,  let 
us  firmly  establish  the  principle  that  before  we  can  hope  to  com- 
prehend anything  in  the  region  of  noumena,  we  must  define  every- 
thing that  it  is  possible  to  define  of  the  world  of  many  dimensions 
by  a  purely  intellectual  method,  by  a  process  of  reasoning.  It  is 
highly  probable  that  by  this  method  we  cannot  define  very  much. 
Perhaps  our  definitions  will  be  too  crude,  will  not  quite  correspond 
to  the  fine  differentiation  of  relations  in  the  noumenal  world: 
all  this  is  possible  and  must  be  taken  into  consideration.  Never- 
theless we  shall  define  what  we  can,  and  at  the  outset  make  as 
clear  as  possible  what  the  noumenal  world  cannot  be;  then  what  it 
can  be — show  what  relations  are  impossible  in  it,  and  what  are 
possible. 

This  is  necessary  in  order  that  our  consciousness,  coming  in 
contact  with  the  noumenal  world,  may  discriminate  between  it 
and  the  phenomenal  world,  and  what  is  more  important,  that  it 
may  not  mistake  simple  reflections  of  the  phenomenal  world  for 
the  noumenal.  We  do  not  know  the  world  of  causes;  we  are  con- 
fined in  the  jail  of  the  phenomenal  world  simply  because  we  do  not 
know  how  to  discern  where  one  ends  and  where  the  other  begins. 
We  are  in  constant  touch  with  the  world  of  causes,  we  live  in  it, 
because  our  consciousness  and  our  incomprehensible  function  in 
the  world  are  part  of  it  or  a  reflection  of  it.  But  we  do  not  see  nor 
know  it  because  we  either  deny  it— consider  that  everything  exist- 
ing is  phenomenal,  and  that  nothing  exists  except  the  phenomenal 
— or  we  recognize  it,  but  try  to  comprehend  it  in  the  forms  of 
the  three-dimensional  phenomenal  world;  or  lastly,  we  search  for 
it  and  find  it  not,  because  we  lose  our  way  amid  the  deceits  and 
illusions  of  the  reflected  phenomenal  world  which  we  mistakenly 
accept  for  the  noumenal  world. 

In  this  dwells  the  tragedy  of  our  spiritual  questings :  we  do  not 
know  what  we  are  searching  for.  And  the  only  method  by  which  we 
can  escape  this  tragedy  consists  in  a  preliminary  intellectual  defini- 
tion of  the  properties  of  that  of  which  we  are  in  search.  Without 
such  definitions,  going  merely  by  indefinite  feelings,  we  shall  not 
approach  the  world  of  causes  or  else  we  shall  get  lost  on  its  border- 
land. 


200  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

Spinoza  understood  this,  saying  that  he  could  not  speak  of  God, 
not  knowing  his  attributes. 

When  I  studied  Euclid,  I  learned  first  of  all  that  the  sum  of  three 
angles  of  a  triangle  was  equal  to  two  right  angles,  and  this  property  of  a 
triangle  was  entirely  comprehensible  to  me,  although  I  did  not  know 
its  many  other  properties.  But  so  far  as  spirits  and  ghosts  are  con- 
cerned, I  do  not  know  even  one  of  their  attributes,  but  constantly 
hear  different  fantastic  tales  about  them  in  which  it  is  impossible  to 
discover  any  truth. 

We  have  established  certain  criteria  which  permit  us  to  deal 
with  the  world  of  noumena  or  the  "world  of  spirits."  These  we 
shall  make  use  of  now. 

First  of  all  we  may  say  that  the  world  of  noumena  cannot  be 
three-dimensional  and  that  there  cannot  be  anything  three- 
dimensional  in  it,  i.  е.,  commeasurable  with  physical  objects,  sim- 
ilar to  them  in  outside  appearance,  having  form — there  cannot  be 
anything  having  extension  in  space  and  changing  in  time.  And 
most  important,  there  cannot  be  anything  unconscious.  In  the 
world  of  causes  everything  must  be  conscious,  because  it  is  con- 
sciousness itself:  the  soul  of  the  world. 

Further  on  will  be  given  the  properties  of  the  world  of  causes. 
For  the  present,  using  only  those  definitions  which  we  have,  let  us 
seek  for  it  in  everything  surrounding  us,  and  in  ourselves. 

Let  us  remember  also  that  the  world  of  causes  is  the  world  of  the 
marvelous;  that  what  appears  simple  to  us  can  never  be  real. 
The  real  appears  to  us  as  the  marvelous.  We  do  not  believe  in  it, 
we  do  not  recognize  it;  and  therefore  we  do  not  feel  the  mysteries 
of  which  life  is  so  full. 

The  simple  is  only  that  which  is  unreal.  The  real  must  seem 
marvelous. 

The  mystery  of  time  penetrates  all.  It  is  felt  in  every  stone, 
which  perhaps  might  have  witnessed  the  glacial  period,  seen  the 
ichthyosaurus  and  the  mammoth.  It  is  felt  in  the  approaching 
day,  which  we  do  not  see,  but  which  possibly  sees  us,  which  per- 
chance is  our  last  day;  or  on  the  other  hand  is  the  day  of  some 
transformation  the  nature  of  which  we  do  not  ourselves  now 
know. 

The  mystery  of  thought  creates  all.  As  soon  as  we  shall  under- 
stand that  thought  is  not  a  "function  of  motion,"  but  that  motion 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  201 

itself  is  only  an  "illusion  of  thought" — and  shall  begin  to  feel  the 
depth  of  this  mystery — we  shall  perceive  that  the  entire  phe- 
nomenal world  is  some  gigantic  hallucination,  which  fails  to 
frighten  us,  and  does  not  drive  us  to  think  that  we  are  mad  simply 
because  we  have  become  accustomed  to  it. 

The  mystery  of  infinity — the  greatest  of  all  mysteries.  It  tells  us 
that  all  the  visible  universe  and  its  galaxies  of  stars  have  no  dimen- 
sion— that  in  relation  to  infinity  they  are  equal  to  a  point,  a  mathe- 
matical point  which  has  no  extension  whatever. 

But  in  "positive"  thinking  we  make  the  effort  то  forget 

ABOUT  ALL  THIS:  NOT  TO  THINK  ABOUT  IT. 

At  some  future  time  positivism  will  be  defined  as  a  system  by 
the  aid  of  which  it  was  possible  not  to  think  of  real  things  and  to 
limit  oneself  to  the  region  of  the  unreal  and  illusory. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

conscious  universe.  Different  forms  of  consciousness.  Different 
lines  of  consciousness.  Animated  nature.  The  souls  of  stones  and 
the  souls  of  trees.  The  soul  of  a  forest.  The  human  "I"  as  a 
collective  consciousness.  Man  as  a  complex  being.  "Humanity" 
as  a  being.  The  world's  consciousness.  The  face  of  Mahadeva. 
Prof.  James  on  the  consciousness  of  the  universe.  Fechner's  ideas. 
"Zendavesta."    A  living  Earth. 

.F  consciousness  exists  in  the  world — then  it  must  permeate 
everything. 

We  have  accustomed  ourselves  to  ascribe  animism  and 
consciousness  in  this  or  that  form  to  those  things  only 
which  we  designate  as  "beings"  i.  е.,  to  those  whom  we 
find  analogous  to  ourselves  in  the  functions  which  define 
animism  in  our  eyes. 

Inanimate  objects  and  mechanical  phenomena  are  to  us  lifeless 
and  unconscious. 

But  this  cannot  be  so. 

It  is  only  for  our  limited  mind,  for  our  limited  power  of  com- 
munion with  other  consciousnesses,  for  our  limited  skill  in  analogy 
that  consciousness  manifests  only  in  certain  classes  of  living 
creatures,  alongside  of  which  a  long  series  of  dead  things  and 
mechanical  phenomena  exist. 

But  if  we  could  not  converse  among  ourselves,  if  every  one  of 
us  could  not  infer  the  existence  of  consciousness  in  another  by 
analogy  with  himself,  then  every  one  would  consider  himself  alone 
to  be  conscious,  and  he  would  relegate  all  the  rest  of  humankind  to 
mechanical,  "dead"  nature. 

In  other  words,  we  recognize  as  conscious,  only  those  beings 
which  are  perfectly  or  imperfectly  conscious  of  themselves  in  their 
three-dimensional  sections  of  the  world,  i.  е.,  beings  whose  con- 
sciousnesses is  analogous  to  ours.  About  other  consciousnesses 
we  do  not  and  cannot  know.  All  "beings,"  conscious  of  them- 
selves,   not   in  the  three-dimensional  section  of  the  world,  are 

203 


204  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

inaccessible  to  us.  If  they  manifest  at  all  in  our  life,  then  we 
necessarily  regard  their  manifestations  as  those  of  dead  and  un- 
conscious nature.  Our  power  of  analogy  is  limited  to  this  section. 
We  cannot  think  logically  outside  of  the  conditions  of  the  three- 
dimensional  section.  Therefore  everything  that  both  lives  and  is 
conscious  of  itself,  though  not  analogous  to  us,  must  appear  dead 
and  mechanical. 

But  sometimes  we  vaguely  feel  an  intense  life  manifesting  in  the 
phenomena  of  nature,  and  sense  a  vivid  emotionality  the  manifes- 
tations of  which  constitute  the  phenomena  of  (to  us)  inanimate  na- 
ture. What  I  wish  to  convey  is  that  behind  the  phenomena  of 
visible  manifestations  is  felt  the  noumenon  of  emotion. 

In  electrical  discharges,  in  thunder  and  lightning,  are  seen  flashes 
of  the  sensuous-nervous  shudderings  of  some  gigantic  organism. 
A  strange  individuality  which  is  all  their  own  is  sensed  in 
certain  days.  There  are  days  brimming  with  the  marvelous  and 
the  mystic,  days  having  each  its  own  individual  and  unique  con- 
sciousness, its  own  emotions,  its  own  thoughts.  One  may  almost 
commune  with  these  days.  And  they  will  tell  you  that  they  live 
a  long,  long  time,  perhaps  eternally,  and  that  they  have  known 
and  seen  many,  many  things. 

In  the  processional  of  the  year;  in  the  iridescent  leaves  of  autumn, 
with  their  memory-laden  smell;  in  the  first  snow,  frosting  the  fields 
and  communicating  a  strange  freshness  and  sensitiveness  to  the 
air;  in  the  spring  freshets,  in  the  warming  sun,  in  the  awakening 
but  still  naked  branches  through  which  gleams  the  turquoise  sky; 
in  the  white  nights  of  the  north,  and  in  the  dark,  humid,  warm 
tropical  nights  spangled  with  stars — in  all  these  are  the  thoughts, 
the  emotions,  the  forms  peculiar  to  itself  alone,  of  some  great  con- 
sciousness; or  better,  all  this  is  the  expression  of  the  emotions, 
thoughts  and  forms  of  consciousness  of  a  mysterious  being — Nature. 
There  can  be  nothing  dead  or  mechanical  in  nature.  If  in 
general  life  and  consciousness  exist,  they  must  exist  in  all.  Life 
and  consciousness  make  up  the  world. 

If  we  consider  nature  from  our  side,  from  the  side  of  phenomena, 
then  it  is  necessary  to  say  that  each  thing,  each  phenomenon, 
possesses  consciousness. 

A  MOUNTAIN,   A  TREE,  A  RIVER,   THE  FISH   WITHIN  THE  RIVER, 

dew  and  rain,  planet,  fire — each  separately  must  possess  a 
consciousness  of  its  own. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  205 

If  we  consider  nature  from  the  other  side,  from  the  side  of 
noumena,  then  it  is  necessary  to  say  that  each  thing  and  each 
phenomenon  of  our  world  is  a  manifestation  in  our  section  of  some 
consciousness,  incomprehensible  to  us,  belonging  to  another  sec- 
tion, that  consciousness  having  there  functions  incomprehensible 
to  us.  In  that  section  of  space,  one  consciousness  is  such  and  its 
function  is  such  that  it  manifests  itself  here  as  a  mountain,  some 
other  manifests  as  a  tree,  a  third  as  a  little  fish,  and  so  forth. 

The  phenomena  of  our  world  are  very  different  from  one 
another.  If  there  are  nothing  else  but  manifestations  in  our  sec- 
tion of  different  consciousnesses,  then  these  consciousnesses  must 
be  very  different  too. 

Between  the  consciousness  of  a  mountain  and  the  consciousness 
of  a  man  there  must  be  the  same  difference  as  between  a  mountain 
and  a  man. 

We  have  already  admitted  the  possibility  of  different  existences. 
We  said  that  a  house  exists,  and  that  a  man  exists,  and  that  an 
idea  exists  also — but  they  all  exist  differently.  If  we  pursue  this 
thought,  then  we  shall  discover  many  kinds  of  different  existences. 

The  fantasy  of  fairy  tales,  making  all  the  world  animate, 
ascribes  human  consciousness  to  mountains,  rivers,  forests.  But 
this  is  just  as  untrue  as  the  complete  denial  of  consciousness  to 
inanimate  nature.  Noumena  are  as  distinct  and  various  as  phe- 
nomena, which  are  their  manifestation  in  our  three-dimensional 
sphere. 

Each  stone,  each  grain  of  sand,  each  planet  has  its  noumenon, 
consisting  of  life  and  of  consciousness,  binding  them  into  certain 
wholes  incomprehensible  to  us. 

The  activity  of  life  of  separate  units  may  vary  greatly.  The 
degree  of  the  activity  of  life  can  be  determined  from  the  stand- 
point of  its  power  of  reproducing  itself.  In  inorganic,  mineral 
nature,  this  activity  is  so  insignificant  that  units  of  this  nature 
accessible  to  our  observation  do  not  reproduce  themselves,  although 
it  may  only  seem  so  to  us  because  of  the  narrowness  of  our  view 
in  time  and  space.  Perhaps  if  that  view  embraced  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  years  and  our  entire  planet  simultaneously,  we 
might  then  see  the  growth  of  minerals  and  metals. 

Were  we  to  observe,  from  the  inside,  one  cubic  centimeter  of  the 
human  body,  knowing  nothing  of  the  existence  of  the  entire  body 
and  of  the  man  himself,  then  the  phenomena  going  on  in  this  little 


206  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

cube  of  flesh  would  seem  like  elemental  phenomena  in  inanimate 
nature. 

But  in  any  case,  for  us  phenomena  are  divided  into  living  and 
mechanical,  and  visible  objects  are  divided  into  organic  and  in- 
organic. The  latter  are  partitioned  without  resistence,  remaining 
as  they  were  before.  It  is  possible  to  break  a  stone  in  halves,  and 
then  there  will  be  two  stones.  But  if  one  were  to  cut  a  snail  in  two, 
then  there  would  not  be  two  snails.  This  means  that  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  stone  is  very  simple,  primitive — so  simple  that 
it  may  be  fractured  without  change  of  state.  But  a  snail  consists 
of  living  cells.  Each  living  cell  is  a  complex  consciousness,  con- 
siderably more  intricate  than  that  of  a  stone.  The  body  of  the 
snail  possesses  the  power  to  move,  to  nourish  itself,  feel  pleasure 
and  pain,  seek  the  first  and  avoid  the  last;  and  most  important 
of  all,  it  possesses  the  faculty  to  multiply,  to  create  new  forms 
similar  to  itself,  to  involve  inorganic  substance  within  these  forms, 
subduing  physical  laws  to  its  service.  The  snail  is  a  complex 
center  of  transmutation  of  some  physical  energies  into  others. 
This  center  possesses  a  consciousness  of  its  own.  It  is  for  this 
reason  that  the  snail  is  indivisible.  Its  consciousness  is  infinitely 
higher  than  that  of  the  stone.  The  snail  has  the  consciousness  of 
form,  i.  е.,  the  form  of  a  snail  is  conscious  of  itself,  as  it  were.  The 
form  of  a  stone  is  not  conscious  of  itself. 

In  inorganic  nature,  where  we  see  life,  consciousness  is  much 
more  easily  discerned.  In  the  snail,  a  living  creature,  we  already 
admit  consciousness  without  difficulty.  But  life  belongs  not  alone 
to  separate,  individual  organisms — anything  indivisible  is  a  living 
being.  Each  cell  in  an  organism  is  a  living  being  and  it  must  be 
conscious  up  to  a  certain  point. 

Each  combination  of  cells  having  a  definite  function  is  a  living 
being  also.  Another  higher  combination — the  organ — is  a  living 
being  no  less,  and  possesses  a  consciousness  of  its  own. 

Indivisibility  in  our  sphere  is  the  sign  of  a  definite  function.  If 
a  given  phenomenon  in  our  plane  is  a  manifestation  of  that  which 
on  another  plane  is  consciousness,  then  on  our  side  evidently,  indi- 
visibility corresponds  to  individuality  of  consciousness  on  that 
other  side.  Divisibility  on  our  side  shows  divisibility  on  that 
side.  The  consciousness  of  the  divisible  can  be  a  collective,  non- 
individual  consciousness  only.  We  recognize  consciousness  in  the 
whole  organism  only. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  207 

But  even  a  complete  organism  is  merely  a  section  of  a  certain 
magnitude,  of  what  we  may  call  the  life  of  this  organism  from  birth 
to  death.  We  may  imagine  this  life  as  a  body  of  four  dimensions  ex- 
tended in  time.  The  three-dimensional  physical  body  is  merely  a 
section  of  the  four-dimensional  body,  Linga  Sharira.  The  image 
of  the  man  which  we  know,  his  "personality,"  is  also  merely  a 
section  of  his  true  personality,  which  undoubtedly  has  its  own 
consciousness.  Therefore  we  see  in  man  quite  clearly,  three  con- 
sciousnesses :  first,  the  consciousness  of  the  body,  which  manifests 
itself  in  instincts,  and  in  the  constant  work  of  the  body;  second, 
his  'personality,  I,  which  we  know,  and  by  which  we  are  conscious 
of  ourselves;  third,  the  consciousness  of  all  life — a  greater  and 
higher  I.  In  our  state  of  development  these  three  consciousnesses 
know  one  another  only  very  imperfectly,  communicating  under 
narcosis  only,  in  trance,  in  ecstacy,  in  sleep,  in  hypnotic  and 
mediumistic  states. 

In  addition  to  our  own  consciousness,  to  us  unknown,  with  which 
we  are  indissolubly  bound,  we  are  surrounded  by  various  other  con- 
sciousnesses which  we  do  not  know  either.  These  consciousnesses 
we  often  feel.  Their  lives  are  composed  of  our  lives.  We  enter 
into  these  consciousnesses  as  their  component  parts,  just  as  into 
our  consciousness  enter  different  I's.  These  consciousnesses  are 
good  or  evil  spirits,  helping  us  or  precipitating  evil.  Family,  clan, 
nation,  race — any  aggregate  to  which  we  belong  (such  an  ag- 
gregate undoubtedly  possesses  a  consciousness  of  its  own,  just  as 
it  possesses  a  life  of  its  own) ,  any  group  of  men  having  its  separate 
function  and  feeling  its  inner  connection  and  unity,  such  as  a 
philosophical  school,  a  "church,"  a  sect,  a  masonic  order,  a  so- 
ciety, a  party,  etc.,  etc. — is  undoubtedly  a  living  and  conscious 
being.  A  nation,  a  people,  is  a  living  being;  humanity  is  a  living 
being  also.  This  is  the  Grand  Man,  Adam  Kadmon  of  the  Kabil- 
ists.  Adam  Kadmon  is  a  being  living  in  men,  uniting  in  himself 
the  lives  of  all  men.  Upon  this  subject,  H.  P.  Blavatsky,  in  her 
great  work,"  The  Secret  Doctrine,"  (Vol.  Ill,  p.  146),  has  this  to  say: 

.  .  .  .  "It  is  not  the  Adam  of  dust  (of  Chapter  II)  who  is  thus 
made  in  the  divine  image,  but  the  Divine  Androgyne  (of  Chapter  I),  or 
Adam  Kadmon." 

Adam  Kadmon — this  is  humanity,  or  humankind — Homo 
Sapiens — the  Sphynx,  i.  е.,  "the  being  with  the  body  of  an  animal 
and  the  face  of  a  superman." 


208  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

Entering  as  a  component  part  into  different  great  and  little 
I's,  the  first  of  which  is  his  life  throughout  its  entire  cycle,  man 
himself  consists  of  an  innumerable  number  of  great  and  little  I's. 
Many  of  the  I's  living  in  him,  do  not  even  know  one  another,  just 
as  men  who  live  in  the  same  house  may  not  know  one  another. 
Expressed  in  terms  of  this  analogy,  it  may  be  said  that  "man"  has 
much  in  common  with  a  house  filled  with  inhabitants  the  most 
diverse.  Or  better,  he  is  like  a  great  ocean  liner  on  which  are 
many  transient  passengers,  each  going  to  his  own  place  for  his 
own  purpose,  each  uniting  in  himself  elements  the  most  diverse. 
And  each  self-conscious  unit  in  the  population  of  this  steamer 
orientates  himself,  involuntarily  and  unconsciously  regards  him- 
self as  the  very  center  of  the  steamer.  This  is  a  fairly  true  present- 
ment of  a  human  being. 

Perhaps  it  would  be  more  correct  to  compare  a  man  with  some 
little  separated  place  on  earth,  living  a  life  of  its  own;  with  a  forest 
lake,  full  of  the  most  diverse  life,  reflecting  the  sun  and  stars,  and 
hiding  in  its  depths  some  incomprehensible  phantasm,  perhaps 
an  undine,  or  a  water-sprite. 

If  we  abandon  analogies  and  return  to  facts,  so  far  as  these  are 
accessible  to  our  observation,  it  then  becomes  necessary  to  begin 
with  several  somewhat  artificial  divisions  of  the  human  being. 
The  old  division  into  body,  soul  and  spirit,  has  in  itself  a  certain 
authenticity,  but  leads  often  to  confusion,  because  when  such  a 
division  is  attempted  disagreements  immediately  arise  as  to 
where  the  body  ends  and  where  the  soul  begins,  where  the  soul 
ends  and  the  spirit  begins,  and  so  forth.  There  are  no  strict 
limits  at  all,  nor  can  there  be.  In  addition  to  this,  confusion 
enters  in  by  reason  of  the  opposition  of  body,  soul  and  spirit,  which 
are  recognized  in  this  case  as  inimical  principles.  This  is  entirely 
erroneous  also,  because  the  body  is  the  expression  of  the  soul,  and 
the  soul  of  the  spirit. 

The  very  terms,  body,  soul  and  spirit  need  explanation.  The 
"body"  is  the  physical  body  with  its  (to  us)  subconscious  mind, 
and  the  psyche  studied  by  scientific  psychology,  i.  е.,  the  reflected 
activity  which  is  guided  by  impressions  received  from  the  external 
world  and  from  the  body.  The  "soul"  is  the  higher  psychic  life, 
guided  by  inner  principles  proceeding  from  itself  as  it  were — not 
depending  upon  outer  impressions  and  the  outer  world.  The 
"  spirit"  comprises  those  higher  principles  which  guide  the  soul-life. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  209 

The  inner  being  of  man,  his  "lower  psyche,"  his  "soul"  and 
his  "spirit"  are  also  divided  according  to  the  nature  of  conscious- 
ness into  three  categories  which  do  not  coincide  with  the  previous 
division. 

First:  the  subconscious  region — the  region  of  instincts,  and  the 
inner  "instinctive"  consciousness  of  the  different  organs,  parts  of 
the  body,  and  the  entire  organism. 

Second:  the  region  of  the  so-called  "clear  consciousness" — 
here  belong  all  the  sensations  and  perceptions  of  the  outer  world 
and  of  the  body  itself,  all  perceptions,  thoughts,  concepts,  ideas, 
feelings,  emotions,  desires,  either  conscious  or  unconscious  at  any 
given  moment,  but  which  may  become  conscious. 

Third:  the  region  of  the  higher  consciousness.  The  higher  con- 
sciousness does  not  manifest  in  the  majority  of  men  at  all,  or  does 
so  only  in  confused  intuitions  and  suggestions.  This  is  the  region 
of  soul  and  spirit.  But  when  man  possesses  higher  consciousness, 
i.  е.,  when  he  is  conscious  in  these  regions,  then  the  higher  con- 
sciousness (i.  е.,  soul  and  spirit)  includes  the  psyche  (both  subcon- 
sciousness and  clear  consciousness)  within  itself,  and  does  not 
exclude  it. 


But  under  the  usual  conditions  of  the  average  man  the  focus  of 
his  consciousness  is  confined  to  the  psyche  perpetually  going  from 
one  object  to  another  in  the  region  of  clear  consciousness  and 
subconsciousness 

/  wish  to  eat. 

I  read  a  newspaper. 

I  wait  for  a  letter. 

and  only  very  rarely  touching  the  regions  of  the  soul  and  spirit. 
But  these  regions  of  the  soul  and  spirit  are  opening  to  the  religious, 
esthetic,  and  moral  emotions,  also  the  higher  intellect,  which  ex- 
presses itself  in  abstract  thinking,  united  with  the  moral  and 
esthetic  sense,  i.  е.,  the  sense  of  the  necessity  of  the  co-ordination 
of  thought,  feeling,  word  and  action. 

But  usually,  in  saying  "I",  a  man  means  not  the  total  com- 
plex of  all  these  regions,  but  that  which  in  a  given  moment  is  in 
the  focus  of  his  consciousness.  /  wish.  These  words,  playing 
the  most  important  role  in  the  life  of  man,  usually  refer  not  at  all 


210  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

to  every  side  of  his  being  simultaneously,  but  merely  to  some 
small  and  insignificant  facet,  which  at  a  given  moment  holds  the 
focus  of  consciousness  and  subjects  to  itself  all  the  rest,  until  it  in 
turn  is  forced  out  by  another  equally  insignificant  facet. 

In  the  self  consciousness  of  man  there  occurs  a  continual  shift- 
ing of  view  from  one  subject  to  another.  Through  the  focus  of  con- 
sciousness runs  a  continuous  cinematographical  film  of  feelings 
and  impressions,  and  each  separate  impression  defines  the  I  of  a 
given  moment. 

From  this  point  of  view  the  consciousness  of  man  has  often  been 
compared  to  a  dark,  sleeping  town,  in  the  midst  of  which  night- 
guards  with  lanterns  slowly  move  about,  each  lighting  up  a  little 
circle  around  himself.  This  is  a  true  analogy.  In  each  given  mo- 
ment there  are  several  such  unsteadily  lighted  circles  in  the  focus 
of  consciousness,  and  all  the  rest  is  enveloped  in  darkness. 

Each  such  little  lighted  circle  represents  an  I,  living  its  own  life, 
sometimes  very  short,  sometimes  outlasting  the  man  himself 
for  a  long  time.  And  there  is  continuous  movement,  either  fast  or 
slow,  moving  out  into  the  light  more  of  new  and  still  new  objects, 
or  else  old  ones  from  the  region  of  memory,  or  tormentingly  re- 
volving in  a  circle  of  the  same  fixed  ideas. 

This  continuous  motion  going  on  in  our  consciousness,  this  un- 
interrupted running  over  of  the  light  from  one  I  to  another,  ex- 
plains the  phenomenon  of  motion  in  the  outer  visible  world. 

We  know  already  by  our  intellect,  that  there  is  no  such  motion. 
We  know  that  everything  exists  in  infinite  spaces  of  time,  nothing 
is  made,  nothing  becomes,  all  is.  But  we  do  not  see  everything 
at  once,  and  therefore  it  seems  to  us  that  everything  moves,  grows, 
is  becoming.  We  do  not  see  everything  at  once,  either  in  the 
outer  world,  nor  in  the  inner  world;  thence  arises  the  illusion  of 
motion.  For  example,  as  we  ride  past  a  house  the  house  turns 
behind  us;  but  if  we  could  see  it,  not  with  our  eyes,  not  in  per- 
spective, but  by  higher  vision,  simultaneously  from  all  sides, 
from  below  and  from  above  and  from  the  inside,  we  would  no 
longer  see  that  illusory  motion,  but  would  see  the  house  entirely 
immobile,  just  as  it  is  in  reality.  Mentally,  we  know  that  the 
house  did  not  move. 

It  is  just  the  same  with  everything  else.  The  motion,  growth, 
"becoming,"  which  is  going  on  all  around  us  in  the  world  is  no 
more  real  than  the  motion  of  a  house  which  we  are  riding  by,  or 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  211 

the  motion  of  trees  and  fields  relative  to  the  windows  of  a  rapidly 
moving  railway  car. 

Motion  goes  on  inside  of  us,  and  it  creates  the  illusion  of 
motion  round  about  us.  The  lighted  circle  runs  quickly  from 
one  I  to  another— from  one  object,  from  one  idea,  from  one 
perception  or  image  to  another:  within  the  focus  of  consciousness 
rapidly  changing  I's  succeed  one  another,  a  little  of  the  light  of 
consciousness  going  over  from  one  I  to  another.  This  is  the  true 
motion  which  alone  exists  in  the  world.  Should  this  motion  stop, 
should  all  I's  simultaneously  enter  the  focus  of  consciousness, 
should  the  light  so  expand  as  to  illumine  all  at  once  that  which  is 
usually  lighted  bit  by  bit  and  gradually,  and  could  a  man  grasp 
simultaneously  by  his  reason  all  that  ever  entered  or  will  enter 
his  consciousness  and  all  that  which  is  never  clearly  illumined  by 
consciousness  and  lies  in  the  subconscious  (producing  its  action 
on  the  psyche  nevertheless) — then  would  a  man  behold  himself 
in  the  midst  of  an  immobile  universe,  in  which  there  would  exist 
simultaneously  everything  that  lies  usually  in  the  remote  depths 
of  memory,  in  the  past;  all  that  lies  at  a  remote  distance  from 
him;  all  that  lies  in  the  future. 

С.  H.  Hinton  very  well  says,  in  regard  to  higher  conscious- 
ness: 

By  the  same  process  by  which  we  know  about  the  existence  of  other 
men  around  us,  we  may  know  of  the  high  intelligences  by  whom  we  are 
surrounded.    We  feel  them  but  we  do  not  realize  them. 

To  realize  them  it  will  be  necessary  to  develop  our  power  of  perception. 

The  power  of  seeing  with  our  bodily  eye  is  limited  to  the  three- 
dimensional  section.  But  the  inner  eye  is  not  thus  limited;  we  can  or- 
ganize our  power  of  seeing  in  higher  space,  and  we  can  form  concep- 
tions of  realities  in  this  higher  space. 

And  this  affords  the  groundwork  for  the  perception  and  study  of 
these  other  beings  than  man. 

We  are,  with  reference  to  the  higher  things  of  life,  like  blind  and 
puzzled  children.  We  know  that  we  are  members  of  one  body,  limbs  of 
one  vine;  but  we  cannot  discern,  except  by  instinct  and  feeling,  what 
that  body  is,  what  the  vine  is. 

Our  problem  consists  in  the  diminution  of  the  limitations  of  our  per- 
ception. . 

Nature  consists  of  many  entities  towards  the  apprehension  of  which 

we  strive. 

For  this  purpose  new  conceptions  have  to  be  formed  first,  and  vast 
fields  of  observation  shall  be  unified  under  one  common  law.  The  real 
history  of  progress  lies  in  the  growth  of  new  conceptions. 


212  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

When  the  new  conception  is  formed  it  is  found  to  be  quite  simple 
and  natural.  We  ask  ourselves  what  we  have  gained;  and  we  answer: 
Nothing;  we  have  simply  removed  an  obvious  limitation. 

The  question  may  be  put :  in  what  way  do  we  come  into  contact  with 
these  higher  beings  at  present?  And  evidently  the  answer  is:  In  those 
ways  in  which  we  tend  to  form  organic  unions — unions  in  which  the  activi- 
ties of  individuals  coalesce  in  a  living  way. 

The  coherence  of  a  military  empire  or  of  a  subjugated  population, 
presenting  no  natural  nucleus  of  growth,  is  not  one  through  which  we 
should  hope  to  grow  into  direct  contact  with  our  higher  destinies.  But 
in  friendship,  in  voluntary  associations,  and  above  all,  in  the  family,  we 
tend  towards  our  greater  life. 

Just  as,  to  explore  the  distant  stars  of  the  heavens,  a  particular 
material  arrangement  is  necessary  which  we.call  a  telescope,  so  to  explore 
the  nature  of  the  beings  who  are  higher  than  we,  a  mental  arrangement  is 
necessary.  We  must  prepare  a  more  extended  power  of  looking.  We 
want  a  structure  developed  inside  the  skull  for  the  one  purpose,  which  an 
exterior  telescope  will  do  for  the  other. 


This  animism  of  nature  takes  the  most  diverse  directions. 
This  tree  is  a  living  being.  The  birch  tree  in  general — the  species 
is  a  living  being.  A  birch  tree  forest  is  a  living  being  also.  A 
forest  in  which  there  are  trees  of  different  kinds,  grass,  flowers, 
ants,  beetles,  birds,  beasts — this  is  a  living  being  too,  living  by  the 
life  of  everything  composing  it,  conscious  through  all  the  con- 
sciousnesses of  which  it  consists. 

This  idea  is  very  interestingly  expressed  in  the  essay  of  P. 
Florensky,  "The  Humanitarian  Roots  of  Idealism."  (The  Theo- 
logical Messenger,  1909,  II,  p.  288.    In  Russian). 

Are  there  many  people  who  regard  a  forest  not  merely  as  a  collective 
proper  noun  and  rhetorical  embodiment,  i.  е.,  as  a  pure  fiction,  but  as 
something  unique,  living?  ....  The  real  unity  is  a  unity  of  self- 
consciousness.  .  .  .  Are  there  many  who  recognize  unity  in  a  forest, 
i.  е.,  the  living  soul  of  a  forest  taken  as  a  whole — voodoo,  wood-demon, 
Old  Nick?  Do  you  consent  to  recognize  undines  and  water  sprites — 
those  souls  of  the  aquatic  element? 

The  activity  of  the  life  of  such  a  composite  being  as  a  forest  is 
not  the  same  as  the  activity  of  different  species  of  plants  and  ani- 
mals, and  the  activity  of  the  life  of  a  species  is  again  different 
from  the  life  of  separate  individuals. 

Moreover,  the  diversity  of  the  functions  expressed  in  different 
ife-activities,  reveals  the  differences  existing  between  the  con- 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  213 

sciousnesses  of  different  "organisms."  The  life-activity  of  a 
single  leaf  of  a  birch  tree,  is  of  course  an  infinitely  lower  form  of 
activity  than  the  life  of  the  tree.  The  activity  of  the  life  of  the 
tree  is  not  such  as  the  activity  of  the  life  of  the  species,  and  the 
life  of  the  species  is  not  such  as  the  life  of  the  forest. 

The  functions  of  these  four  "lives"  are  entirely  different,  and 
their  consciousnesses  must  be  correspondingly  different  also. 

The  consciousness  of  a  single  cell  of  the  human  body  must  be 
as  much  lower  in  comparison  with  the  consciousness  of  the  body — 
i.  е.,  with  the  "physical  consciousness  of  man" — as  its  life- 
activity  is  lower  in  comparison  with  the  life-activity  of  the 
entire  organism. 

Therefore  we  may  regard  the  noumenon  of  a  phenomenon  as 
the  soul  of  that  phenomenon,  i.  е.,  the  hidden  soul  of  a  phe- 
nomenon is  its  noumenon.  The  concept  of  the  soul  of  a  phenomenon 
or  the  noumenon  of  a  phenomenon  includes  within  itself  both  life  and 
consciousness  together  with  their  functions  in  sections  of  the 
world  incomprehensible  to  us;  and  the  manifestation  of  those  in 
our  sphere  constitutes  a  phenomenon. 

The  idea  of  an  animistic  universe  leads  inevitably  to  the  idea 
of  a  "World-Soul" — a  "Being"  whose  manifestation  is  this  visible 
universe. 

The  idea  of  the  "World-Soul"  was  very  picturesquely  under- 
stood in  the  ancient  religions  of  India.  The  mystical  poem,  The 
Bhagavad  Gita  gives  a  remarkable  presentment  of  Mahadeva, 
i.  е.,  the  great  Deva  whose  life  is  this  world. 

Thus  Krishna  propounded  his  teaching  to  his  disciples.  .  .  .  pre- 
paring them  for  an  apprehension  of  those  high  spiritual  truths  which 
unfold  before  his  inner  sight  in  a  moment  of  illumination. 

When  he  spoke  of  Mahadeva  his  voice  became  very  deep,  and  his  face 
was  illuminated  by  an  inner  light. 

Once  Arjuna,  in  an  impulse  of  boldness,  said  to  him: 

Let  us  see  Mahadeva  in  his  divine  form.    May  we  behold  him? 

And  then  Krishna  .  .  .  began  to  speak  of  a  being  who  breathes  in 
every  creature,  has  an  hundred-fold  and  a  thousand-fold  forms,  many- 
faced,  many-eyed,  facing  everywhere,  and  who  surpasses  everything 
created  by  infinity,  who  envelopes  in  his  body  the  whole  world,  things 
still  and  animate.  If  the  radiance  of  a  thousand  suns  should  burst 
forth  suddenly  in  the  sky,  it  would  not  compare  with  the  radiance  of 
that  Mighty  Spirit. 

When  Krishna  spoke  thus  of  Mahadeva,  a  beam  of  light  of  such  tre- 
mendous force   shone   in  his  eyes,  that  his  disciples  could  not  endure 


214  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

the  radiance  of  that  light,  and  fell  at  Krishna's  feet.  From  very  fear  the 
hair  rose  on  Arjuna's  head,  and  bowing  low  he  said:  Thy  words  are 
terrible,  we  cannot  look  upon  such  a  being  as  Thou  evokest  before  our 
eyes.    His  form  makes  us  tremble.* 

In  an  interesting  book  of  lectures  by  Prof.  William  James, 
"A  Pluralistic  Universe"  there  is  a  lecture  on  Fechner,  devoted  to 
"a  conscious  universe." 

Ordinary  monistic  idealism  leaves  everything  intermediary  out.  It 
recognizes  only  extremes,  as  if,  after  the  first  rude  face  of  the  phenomenal 
world  in  all  its  particularity,  nothing  but  the  supreme  in  all  its  perfection 
could  be  found.  First,  you  and  I,  just  as  we  are  in  this  room;  and  the 
moment  we  get  below  that  surface,  the  unutterable  itself !  Doesn't  this 
show  a  singularly  indigent  imagination?  Isn't  this  brave  universe  made 
on  a  richer  pattern,  with  room  in  it  for  a  long  hierarchy  of  beings? 
Materialistic  science  makes  it  infinitely  richer  in  terms,  with  its  mole- 
cules, and  ether,  and  electrons  and  what  not.  Absolute  idealism,  think- 
ing of  reality  only  under  intellectual  forms,  knows  not  what  to  do  with 
bodies  of  any  grade,  and  can  make  no  use  of  any  psycho-physical  analogy 
or  correspondence. 

Fechner,  from  whose  writings  Prof.  James  makes  copious  quo- 
tation, upheld  quite  a  different  view-point.  Fechner's  ideas  are 
so  near  to  those  which  have  been  presented  in  the  previous  chapters 
that  we  shall  dwell  upon  them  more  extensively. 

I  use  the  words  of  Prof.  James: 

The  original  sin,  according  to  Fechner,  of  both  our  popular  and 
scientific  thinking,  is  our  inveterate  habit  of  regarding  the  spiritual  not 
as  the  rule  but  as  an  exception  in  the  midst  of  nature.  Instead  of  be- 
lieving our  life  to  be  fed  at  the  breasts  of  the  greater  life,  our  individual- 
ity to  be  sustained  by  the  greater  individuality,  which  must  necessarily 
have  more  consciousness  and  more  independence  than  all  that  it  brings 
forth,  we  habitually  treat  whatever  lies  outside  of  our  life  as  so  much 
slag  and  ashes  of  life  only. 

Or  if  we  believe  in  Divine  Spirit,  we  fancy  it  on  the  one  side  as  bodi- 
less, and  nature  as  soulless  on  the  other. 

What  comfort,  or  peace,  Fechner  asks,  can  come  from  such  a  doc- 
trine? The  flowers  wither  at  its  breath,  the  stars  turn  into  stone;  our 
own  body  grows  unworthy  of  our  spirit  and  sinks  to  a  tenement  for 
carnal  senses  only.  The  book  of  nature  turns  into  a  volume  on  mechan- 
ics, in  which  whatever  has  life  is  treated  as  a  sort  of  anomaly;  a  great 
chasm  of  separation  yawns  between  us  and  all  that  is  higher  than  our- 
selves; and  God  becomes  a  thinnest  of  abstractions. 

Fechner's  great  instrument  for  verifying  the  daylight  view  is  ana- 
logy^   

*  "The  Great  Initiates"  by  E.  Schure. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  215 

Bain  defines  genius  as  the  power  of  seeing  analogies. 

The  number  that  Fechner  could  perceive  was  prodigious;  but  he  in- 
sisted on  the  differences  as  well.  Neglect  to  make  allowance  for  these,  he 
said,  is  the  common  fallacy  in  analogical  reasoning. 

Most  of  us,  for  example,  reasoning  justly  that,  since  all  the  minds  we 
know  are  connected  with  bodies,  therefore  God's  mind  should  be  con- 
nected with  a  body,  proceed  to  suppose  that  that  body  must  be  just  an 
animal  body  over  again,  and  paint  an  altogether  human  picture  of  God. 
But  all  that  the  analogy  comports  is  a  body — the  particular  features  of 
our  body  are  adaptations  to  a  habitat  so  different  from  God's  that  if 
God  have  a  physical  body  at  all,  it  must  be  utterly  different  from  ours 
in  structure. 

The  vaster  orders  of  mind  go  with  the  vaster  orders  of  body.  The 
entire  earth  on  which  we  live  must  have,  according  to  Fechner,  its  own 
collective  consciousness.  So  must  each  sun,  moon,  planet;  so  must  the 
whole  solar  system  have  its  own  wider  consciousness,  on  which  the  con- 
sciousness of  our  earth  plays  one  part.  So  has  the  entire  starry  system 
as  such  its  consciousness;  and  if  that  starry  system  be  not  the  sum  of 
all  that  IS,  materially  considered,  then  that  whole  system,  along  with 
whatever  else  may  be,  is  the  body  of  that  absolutely  totalized  conscious- 
ness of  the  universe  to  which  men  give  the  name  of  God.  Specula- 
tively Fechner  is  thus  a  monist  in  his  theology;  but  there  is  room  in  his 
universe  for  every  grade  of  spiritual  being  between  man  and  the  final  all- 
inclusive  God. 

The  earth-soul  he  passionately  believes  in;  he  treats  the  earth  as  our 
special  human  guardian  angel;  we  can  pray  to  the  earth  as  men  pray  to 
their  saints. 

His  most  important  conclusion  is,  that  the  constitution  of  the  world 
is  identical  throughout.  In  ourselves,  visual  consciousness  goes  with 
our  eyes,  tactile  consciousness  with  our  skin.  But  altho  neither 
skin  nor  eye  knows  aught  of  the  sensations  of  the  other,  they  come 
together  and  figure  in  some  sort  of  relation  and  combination  in  the  more 
inclusive  consciousness  which  each  of  us  names  his  self.  Quite  similarly, 
then,  says  Fechner,  we  must  suppose  that  my  consciousness  of  myself 
and  yours  of  yourself,  although  in  their  immediacy  they  keep  separate 
and  know  nothing  of  each  other,  are  yet  known  and  used  together  in  a 
higher  consciousness,  that  of  the  human  race,  say  into  which  they  enter 
as  constituent  parts. 

Similarly,  the  whole  human  and  animal  kingdoms  come  together  as 
conditions  of  a  consciousness  of  still  wider  scope.  This  combines  in 
the  soul  of  the  earth  with  the  consciousness  of  the  vegetable  kingdom, 
which  in  turn  contributes  its  share  of  experience  to  that  of  the  whole 
solar  system  etc. 

The  supposition  of  an  earth-consciousness  meets  a  strong  instinctive 
prejudice.  All  the  consciousness  we  directly  know  seems  told  to  brains. 
But  our  brain  which  primarily  serves  to  correlate  our  muscular  reactions 
with  the  external  objects  on  which  we  depend,  performs  a  function  which 
the  earth  performs  in  an  entirely  different  way.     She  has  no  proper 


216  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

muscles  or  limbs  of  her  own,  and  the  only  objects  external  to  her  are  the 
other  stars.  To  these  her  whole  mass  reacts  by  most  exquisite  alter- 
ations in  its  total  gait,  and  by  still  more  exquisite  vibratory  responses  in 
its  substance.  Her  ocean  reflects  the  lights  of  heaven  as  on  a  mighty 
mirror,  her  atmosphere  refracts  them  like  a  monstrous  lens,  the  clouds 
and  snow-fields  combine  them  into  white,  the  woods  and  flowers  disperse 
them  into  colors.  Polarization,  interference,  absorption,  awaken  sensi- 
bilities in  matter  of  which  our  senses  are  too  coarse  to  take  any  note. 

For  these  cosmic  relations  of  hers,  then,  she  no  more  needs  a  special 
brain  than  she  needs  eyes  or  ears.  Our  brains  do  indeed  unify  and  cor- 
relate innumerable  functions.  Our  eyes  know  nothing  of  sound,  our 
ears  nothing  of  light,  but  having  brains,  we  can  feel  sound  and  light 

together,  and  compare  them Must  every  higher  means 

of  unification  between  things  be  a  literal  brain-fiber?  Cannot  the  earth- 
mind  know  otherwise  the  contents  of  our  minds  together? 

In  a  striking  page  Fechner  relates  one  of  his  moments  of  direct  vision 
of  truth. 

"On  a  certain  morning  I  went  out  to  walk.  The  fields  were  green, 
the  birds  sang,  the  dew  glistened,  the  smoke  was  rising,  here  and  there 
a  man  appeared,  a  light  as  of  transfiguration  lay  on  all  things.  It  was 
only  a  little  bit  of  earth;  it  was  only  one  moment  of  her  existence;  and 
yet  as  my  look  embraced  her  more  and  more  it  seemed  to  me  not  only 
so  beautiful  an  idea,  but  so  true  and  clear  a  fact,  that  she  is  an  angel,  an 

angel carrying  me  along  with  her  into  Heaven 

I  asked  myself  how  the  opinions  of  men  could  ever  have  so  spun  them- 
selves away  from  life   so  far  as   to   deem  the  earth  only   a  dry  clod 

But  such  an  experience  as  this  passes  for  fantasy. 

The  earth  is  a  globular  body,  and  what  more  she  may  be,  one  can  find  in 
mineralogical  cabinets." 

The  special  thought  of  Fechner's — is  his  belief  that  the  more  in- 
clusive forms  of  consciousness  are  in  part  constituted  by  the  more  limited 
forms.  Not  that  they  are  the  mere  sum  of  the  more  limited  forms.  As 
our  mind  is  not  the  bare  sum  of  our  sights  plus  our  sounds,  plus  our 
pains,  but  in  adding  these  terms  together  it  also  finds  relations  among 
them  and  weaves  them  into  schemes  and  forms  and  objects  of  which 
no  one  sense  in  its  separate  estate  knows  anything,  so  the  earth-soul 
traces  relations  between  the  contents  of  my  mind  and  the  contents  of 
yours  of  which  neither  of  our  separate  minds  is  conscious.  It  has 
schemes,  forms,  and  objects  proportionate  to  its  wider  field,  which  our 
mental  fields  are  far  too  narrow  to  cognize.  By  ourselves  we  are  simply 
out  of  relation  with  each  other,  for  we  are  both  of  us  there,  and  different 
from  each  other,  which  is  a  positive  relation.  What  we  are  without 
knowing,  it  knows  that  we  are.  It  is  as  if  the  total  universe  of  inner  life 
had  a  sort  of  grain  or  direction,  a  sort  of  valvular  structure,  permitting 
knowledge  to  flow  in  one  way  only,  so  that  the  wider  might  always  have 
the  narrower  under  observation,  but  never  the  narrower  the  wider. 

Fechner  likens  our  individual  persons  on  the  earth  unto  so  many 
sense-organs  of  the  earth-soul.    We  add  to  its  perceptive  life 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  .  217 

It  absorbs  our  perceptions  into  its  larger  sphere  of  knowledge,  and  com- 
bines them  with  the  other  data  there.  The  memories  and  conceptual 
relations  that  have  spun  themselves  round  the  perceptions  of  a  certain 
person  remain  in  the  larger  earth-life  as  distinct  as  ever,  and  form  new 
relations    .     .     .     ." 

Fechner's  ideas  are  expounded  in  his  book  "Zendavesta." 

I  have  made  such  a  lengthy  quotation  from  Prof.  James'  book 
in  order  to  show  that  the  ideas  of  the  animism  and  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  world  are  neither  new  nor  paradoxical.  It  is  a 
natural  and  logical  necessity,  resulting  from  a  broader  view  of 
the  world  than  that  which  we  usually  permit  ourselves  to  hold. 

Logically  we  must  either  recognize  life  and  consciousness  in 
everything,  in  all  "dead  nature,"  or  deny  them  completely,  even 

IN  OURSELVES. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

Consciousness  and  life.  Life  as  knowledge.  Consciousness  as  a  realiza- 
tion of  existence.  Intellect  and  emotions.  Emotion  as  an  organ  of 
knowledge.  The  evolution  of  emotion  from  the  standpoint  of 
knowledge.  Pure  and  impure  emotions.  Personal  and  impersonal 
emotions.  Personal  and  super-personal  emotions.  The  elimination 
of  self  elements  as  a  means  of  approach  to  true  knowledge.  "  Be  as 
little  children.  ."  "  Blessed  are  the  pure  in  heart.  ."  The  value 
of  morals  from  the  standpoint  of  knowledge.  The  defects  of  in- 
tellectualism.  Dreadnaughts  as  the  crown  of  intellectual  culture. 
The  dangers  of  morality.  Moral  esthetics.  Religion  and  art  as  or- 
organized  forms  of  emotional  knowledge.  The  knowledge  of  God 
and  the  knowledge  of  beauty. 

he  meaning  of  life — this  is  the  eternal  theme  of  human 
meditation.  All  philosophical  systems,  all  religious 
teachings  strive  to  find  and  give  to  men  the  answer  to 
this  question.  Some  say  that  the  meaning  of  life  is  in 
service,  in  the  surrender  of  self,  in  self-sacrifice,  in  the 
sacrifice  of  everything,  even  life  itself.  Others  declare  that  the 
meaning  of  life  is  in  the  delight  of  it,  relieved  against  "the  expecta- 
tion of  the  final  horror  of  death."  Some  say  that  the  meaning  of 
life  is  perfection,  and  the  creation  of  a  better  future  beyond  the 
grave,  or  in  future  lives  for  ourselves.  Others  say  that  the  mean- 
ing of  life  is  in  the  approach  to  non-existence:  still  others,  that  the 
meaning  of  life  is  in  the  perfection  of  the  race,  in  the  organization 
of  life  on  earth;  while  there  are  those  who  deny  the  possibility  of 
even  attempting  to  know  its  meaning. 

The  fault  of  all  these  explanations  consists  in  the  fact  that  they 
all  attempt  to  discover  the  meaning  of  life  outside  of  itself,  either 
in  the  future  of  humanity,  or  in  some  problematical  existence  be- 
yond the  grave,  or  again  in  the  evolution  of  the  Ego  throughout 
many  successive  incarnations — always  in  something  outside  of  the 
present  life  of  man.  But  if  instead  of  thus  speculating  about  it, 
men  would  simply  look  within  themselves,  then  they  would  see 
that  in  reality  the  meaning  of  life  is  not  after  all  so  obscure.  It 
consists  in  knowledge.    All  life,  through  all  its  facts,  events  and 

219 


220  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

incidents,  excitements  and  attractions,  inevitably  leads  us  то  the 
knowledge  of  something.  All  life-experience  is  knowledge. 
The  most  powerful  emotion  in  man  is  his  yearning  toward  the 
unknown.  Even  in  love,  the  most  powerful  of  all  attractions, 
to  which  everything  is  sacrificed,  is  this  yearning  toward  the  un- 
known, toward  the  new — curiosity. 

The  Persian  poet-philosopher,  Al-Ghazzali,  says:  "  The  highest 
function  of  mans  soul  is  the  perception  of  truth."  * 

In  the  very  beginning  of  this  book  consciousness  and  the 
world  were  recognized  as  existing:  I  and  Not-I.  The  world  is 
everything  that  exists.  Consciousness  may  be  defined  as  the 
realization  of  existence. 

The  I  realizes  its  existence  and  the  existence  of  the  world,  a  part 
of  which  it  is.  Its  relation  to  itself  and  to  the  world  is  called 
knowledge.  The  expansion  and  deepening  of  its  relation  to  itself 
and  to  the  world  is  the  expansion  of  knowledge. 

All  of  the  soul-properties  of  man,  all  the  elements  of  his  con- 
sciousness— sensations,  perceptions,  conceptions,  ideas,  judg- 
ments, reasonings,  feelings,  emotions,  even  creation — all  these  are 
the  instruments  of  knowledge  which  the  I  possesses. 

Feelings — from  the  simple  emotions  up  to  the  most  complex, 
such  as  esthetic,  religious  and  moral  emotion — and  creation — 
from  the  creation  of  a  savage  making  a  stone  hatchet  for  himself 
up  to  the  creation  of  a  Beethoven — these  indeed  are  instruments 
of  knowledge. 

Only  to  our  narrow  human  view  do  they  appear  to  serve  other 
purposes — the  preservation  of  life,  the  construction  of  something, 
or  merely  pleasure.    In  reality  all  this  conduces  to  knowledge. 

Evolutionists,  followers  of  Darwin,  say  that  the  struggle  for 
existence  and  the  selection  of  the  fittest  created  the  mind  and 
feeling  of  contemporary  man — that  mind  and  feeling  serve  life, 
preserve  the  life  of  separate  individuals  and  of  the  species — and 
that  beyond  this  they  have  no  meaning  in  themselves.  But  it  is 
possible  to  answer  this  with  the  same  arguments  before  advanced 
against  the  mechanicality  of  the  universe;  namely,  that  if  con- 
sciousness exists,  then  nothing  exists  except  consciousness.  The 
struggle  for  existence  and  the  survival  of  the  fittest,  if  they  truly 
play  such  a  role  in  the  creation  of  life  are  also  not  merely  accidents, 
but  products  of  consciousness,  of  which — we  do  not  know;  and 
they  also  conduce,  like  everything  else,  то  knowledge. 

*  Al-Ghazzali,  "The  Alchemy  of  Happiness." 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  221 

But  we  do  not  realize,  do  not  discern  the  presence  of  con- 
sciousness in  the  laws  of  nature.  This  happens  because  we  study 
always  not  the  whole  but  the  part,  and  we  do  not  divine  the  con- 
sciousness belonging  to  the  whole — by  studying  the  little  finger 
of  a  man  we  cannot  discover  his  consciousness.  It  is  the  same 
way  in  our  relation  to  nature :  we  study  always  the  little  finger  of 
nature.    When  we  come  to  realize  this  we  shall  understand  that 

EVERY    LIFE    IS    THE    MANIFESTATION    OF    A    PART    OF    SOME    SELF- 
CONSCIOUS  WHOLE. 

In  order  to  comprehend  the  consciousness  of  the  whole,  it  is 
necessary  to  understand  the  character  of  the  whole.  Conscious- 
ness is  the  function  of  the  whole,  thus  the  function  of  man  is  con- 
sciousness. But  without  understanding  "man"  as  a  whole,  it  is 
impossible  to  understand  his  consciousness. 

To  understand  what  our  consciousness  is  it  is  necessary  to  clear 
up  our  relation  to  life. 

In  Chapter  X  an  attempt  was  made — a  very  artificial  one, 
founded  upon  the  analogy  with  a  world  of  two-dimensional  beings 
— to  define  life  as  motion  in  a  sphere  higher  in  dimensionality  in 
comparison  with  ours.  From  this  standpoint  every  separate  life 
is  as  it  were  the  manifestation  in  our  sphere  of  a  part  of  one  of  the 
consciousness  of  another  sphere.  These  consciousnesses  look  in 
upon  us,  as  it  were,  in  these  lives  which  we  see.  When  a  man  dies, 
one  eye  of  the  Universe  closes,  says  Fechner.  Every  separate 
human  life  is  a  moment  of  consciousness  of  some  great  being,  which 
lives  in  us.  Every  separate  life  of  a  tree  is  a  moment  of  con- 
sciousness of  a  being,  the  life  of  which  is  composed  of  the  lives  of 
trees.  The  consciousnesses  of  these  higher  beings  do  not  exist 
independently  of  these  lower  lives.  They  are  two  sides  of  one 
and  the  same  thing.  Every  single  human  consciousness,  in  some 
other  section  of  the  world,  may  produce  the  illusion  of  many  lives. 

This  is  difficult  to  illustrate  by  an  example.  But  if  we  take 
Hinton's  spiral,  passing  through  a  plane,  and  the  point  running  in 
circles  on  the  plane  (see  p.  60),  and  conceive  of  the  spiral  as 
consciousness,  then  the  moving  point  of  intersection  of  the  spiral 
with  the  plane  will  be  life.  This  example  clearly  illustrates  the 
relation  between  consciousness  and  life. 

To  us,  life  and  consciousness  are  different  and  separate  from 
one  another,  because  we  are  inept  at  seeing,  inept  at  looking  at 
things.     And  this  in  turn  depends  upon  the  fact  that  it  is  very 


222  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

difficult  for  us  to  step  outside  the  frames  of  our  divisions.  We 
see  the  life  of  a  tree,  of  this  tree;  and  if  we  are  told  that  the  life  of 
a  tree  is  a  manifestation  of  consciousness,  then  we  understand  it 
in  such  a  way  that  the  life  of  this  tree  is  the  manifestation  of  the 
consciousness  of  this  tree.  But  this  is  of  course  an  absurdity  re- 
sulting from  "three-dimensional  thinking,"  the  "Euclidian 
mind. "  The  life  of  this  tree  is  a  manifestation  of  the  consciousness 
of  the  species,  or  family,  or  perhaps  of  the  consciousness  of  the 
entire  vegetable  kingdom. 

In  exactly  the  same  way,  our  separate  lives  are  manifestations  of 
some  great  consciousness.  We  find  the  proof  of  this  in  the  fact 
that  our  lives  have  no  other  meaning  at  all  aside  from  that  process 
of  acquiring  knowledge  performed  by  us.  A  thoughtful  man  ceases 
to  feel  painfully  the  absence  of  meaning  in  life  only  when  he  real- 
izes this,  and  begins  to  strive  consciously  for  that  for  which  he 
strove  unconsciously  before. 

This  process  of  acquiring  knowledge,  representing  our  function 
in  the  world,  is  performed  not  by  the  intellect  only,  but  by  our 
entire  organism,  by  all  the  body,  by  all  the  life,  and  by  all  the  life 
of  human  society,  its  organizations,  its  institutions,  by  all  culture 
and  all  civilization.  And  we  acquire  the  knowledge  of  that  which 
we  deserve  to  know. 

If  we  declare  in  regard  to  the  intellectual  side  of  man  that  its 
purpose  is  knowledge  this  will  evoke  no  doubts.  All  agree  that 
the  human  intellect  together  with  everything  subjected  to  its 
functions  is  for  the  purpose  of  knowledge.  But  concerning  the 
emotions:  joy,  sorrow,  rage,  fear,  love,  hatred,  pride,  compassion, 
jealousy;  concerning  the  sense  of  beauty,  esthetic  pleasure  and 
artistic  creation;  concerning  the  moral  sense;  concerning  all  re- 
ligious emotions:  faith,  hope,  veneration,  etc.,  etc., — concerning 
all  human  activity — things  are  not  so  clear.  We  usually  do  not 
see  that  all  emotions,  and  all  human  activity  serve  knowledge. 
How  do  fear,  or  love,  or  work  serve  knowledge?  It  seems  to  us 
that  by  emotions  we  feel;  by  work — create.  Feeling  and  creation 
seem  to  us  as  something  different  from  knowledge.  Concerning 
work,  creative  power,  creation,  we  are  rather  inclined  to  think 
that  they  demand  knowledge,  and  if  they  serve  it,  do  so  only  indi- 
rectly. In  the  same  way  it  is  incomprehensible  how  religious 
emotions  serve  knowledge. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  223 

Usually  the  emotional  is  opposed  to  the  intellectual — "heart"  to 
"mind."  Some  place  "cold  reason"  or  intellect  over  against 
feelings,  emotions,  esthetic  pleasure;  and  from  these  they  separate 
the  moral  sense,  the  religious  sense,  and  "spirituality." 

The  misunderstanding  here  lies  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
words  intellect  and  emotion. 

Between  intellect  and  emotion  there  is  no  sharp  distinction. 
Intellect,  considered  as  a  whole,  is  also  emotion.  But  in  every- 
day language,  and  in  "conversational  psychology"  reason  is  con- 
trasted with  feeling;  will  is  considered  as  a  separate  and  independ- 
ent faculty;  moralists  consider  moral  feeling  as  entirely  distinct 
from  all  these;  religionists  consider  separately  spirituality,  or 
faith. 

One  often  hears  such  expressions  as:  reason  mastered  feeling; 
will  mastered  desire;  the  sense  of  duty  mastered  passion;  spirit- 
uality mastered  intellectuality;  faith  conquered  reason.  But  all 
these  are  merely  the  incorrect  expressions  of  conversational  psy- 
chology; just  as  incorrect  as  are  the  expressions  "sunrise"  and 
"sunset."  In  reality  in  the  soul  of  man  nothing  exists  save  emo- 
tions. And  the  soul  life  of  man  is  either  a  struggle  or  an  adjust- 
ment between  different  emotions.  Spinoza  saw  this  quite 
clearly  when  he  said  that  emotion  can  be  mastered  only  by  an- 
other more  powerful  emotion,  and  by  nothing  else.  Reason,  will, 
feeling,  duty,  faith,  spirituality,  mastering  some  other  emotion, 
can  conquer  only  by  force  of  the  emotional  element  contained  in 
them.  The  ascetic  who  kills  all  desires  and  passions  in  himself, 
kills  them  by  the  desire  for  salvation.  A  man  renouncing  all  the 
pleasures  of  the  world,  renounces  them  because  of  the  delight  of 
sacrifice,  of  renunciation.  A  soldier  dying  at  his  post  through 
sense  of  duty,  does  so  because  the  emotion  of  devotion,  or  faithful- 
ness is  more  powerful  in  him  than  all  others.  A  man  whose  moral 
sense  prompts  him  to  overcome  passion  in  himself,  does  so  because 
the  moral  sense  (i.  е.,  emotion)  is  more  powerful  than  all  his  other 
feelings,  other  emotions.  In  substance  all  this  is  perfectly  clear 
and  simple,  but  it  has  become  confused  and  confusing  simply  be- 
cause men,  calling  different  degrees  of  one  and  the  same  thing  by 
diverse  names,  began  to  see  fundamental  differences  where  there 
were  only  differences  in  degree. 

Will  is  the  resultant  of  desires.  We  call  that  man  strong-willed 
in  whom  the  will  proceeds  on  definite  lines,  without  turning  aside; 


224  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

and  we  call  that  man  weak-willed  in  whom  the  line  of  the  will 
takes  a  zig-zag  course,  turning  aside  here  or  there  under  the  influ- 
ence of  every  new  desire.  But  this  does  not  mean  that  will  and 
desire  are  something  opposite;  quite  the  reverse,  they  are  one  and 
the  same,  because  the  will  is  composed  of  desires. 

Reason  cannot  conquer  feeling,  because  feeling  can  be  con- 
quered only  by  feeling.  Reason  can  only  give  thoughts  and 
pictures,  evoking  feelings  which  will  conquer  the  feeling  of  a  given 
moment.  Spirituality  is  not  opposed  to  "  intellectuality"  or  "  emo- 
tionality." It  is  only  their  higher  flight.  Intellect  has  no 
limits:  only  the  human  "Euclidean"  mind  is  limited. 

But  what  is  "intellect?" 

Intellect  is  the  active  aspect  of  any  given  consciousness.  In 
the  earth's  animal  kingdom,  in  all  animals  lower  than  man,  we  see 
passive  consciousness.  But  with  the  appearance  of  concepts  con- 
sciousness becomes  active,  and  its  active  part  begins  to  work  as 
intellect.  The  animal  is  conscious  through  his  emotions.  The 
intellect  is  present  in  the  animal  only  in  an  embryonic  state,  as  an 
emotion  of  curiosity. 

In  man  the  growth  of  consciousness  consists  in  the  growth  of 
the  intellect  and  the  accompanying  growth  of  the  higher  emo- 
tions— esthetic,  religious,  moral — which  according  to  the  measure 
of  their  growth  become  more  and  more  intellectualized,  while 
simultaneously  with  this  the  intellect  is  assimilating  emotion- 
ality, ceasing  to  be  "cold." 

Thus  "spirituality"  is  a  fusion  of  the  intellect  with  the  higher 
emotions.  The  intellect  is  spiritualized  from  the  emotions;  the 
emotions  are  spiritualized  from  the  intellect. 

The  functions  of  the  intellect  are  not  limited,  but  not  often  does 
the  human  intellect  rise  to  its  highest  form.  It  is  incorrect  to 
say  that  the  highest  form  of  human  knowledge  will  not  be  in- 
tellectual, but  of  a  different  character,  because  the  intuitive  mind, 
from  the  human  standpoint,  is  the  higher  intellect;  and  this  higher 
intellect  is  entirely  unrestricted  by  logical  concepts  and  by  Eu- 
clidean modes  of  thought.  We  are  likely  to  hear  a  great  deal  con- 
cerning this  from  the  standpoint  of  mathematics,  which  as  a  matter 
of  fact  transcended  the  reasoning  of  logic  long  ago.  But  it  achieved 
this  by  the  aid  of  the  intellect.  Intuition  grows  in  the  soil  of  the 
intellect  and  of  the  higher  emotions,  but  it  is  not  created  by  them. 
A  tree  grows  in  the  earth,  but  it  is  not  created  by  the  earth.    A 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  225 

seed  is  necessary.  This  seed  may  be  in  the  soul,  or  absent  from 
it  When  it  is  there  it  can  be  cultivated  or  it  can  be  choked;  when 
it  is  not  there  it  is  impossible  to  replace  it  with  anything  else. 
The  soul  (if  a  soul  it  may  be  called)  lacking  that  seed,  1.  е.,  in- 
ept to  feel  and  reflect  the  world  of  the  wondrous,  will  never  put 
forth  the  living  sprout  of  intuition,  but  will  always  reflect  the 
phenomenal  world,  and  that  alone. 

At  the  present  stage  of  his  development  man  comprehends 
many  things  by  means  of  his  intellect,  but  at  the  same  time  he 
comprehends  many  things  by  means  of  his  emotions.  In  no  case 
are  emotions  merely  organs  of  feeling  for  feeling' s  sake:  they  are  all 
organs  of  knowledge.  In  every  emotion  man  knows  something 
that  he  could  not  know  without  its  aid— something  that  he  could 
know  by  no  other  emotion,  by  no  effort  of  the  intellect.  If  we 
consider  the  emotional  nature  of  man  as  self-contained,  as  serving 
life  and  not  serving  knowledge  we  shall  never  understand  its  true 
content  and  significance.  Emotions  serve  knowledge.  There  are 
things  and  relations  which  can  be  known  only  emotionally,  and 
only  through  a  given  emotion. 

To  understand  the  psychology  of  play,  it  is  necessary  to  experi- 
ence the  emotions  of  the  player;  to  understand  the  psychology  of 
the  hunt,  it  is  necessary  to  experience  the  emotions  of  the  hunter; 
the  psychology  of  a  man  in  love  is  incomprehensible  to  him  who 
is  cold  and  unfeeling;  the  state  of  mind  of  Archimedes  when  he 
jumped  out  of  the  bath  tub  is  incomprehensible  to  the  staid  citizen, 
who  would  look  on  such  a  performance  as  a  sign  of  insanity;  the 
feelings  of  the  globe-trotter,  delightedly  breathing  in  the  sea  air 
and  sweeping  with  his  eyes  the  wide  horizon,  is  incomprehensible 
to  the  sedentary  stay-at-home.  The  feeling  of  a  believer  is  incom- 
prehensible to  an  unbeliever,  and  to  a  believer  the  f  eelmg  of  an  un- 
believer is  quite  as  strange.    Men  understand  one  another  so  im- 
perfectly because  they  live  always  by  different  emotions.     And 
when  they  feel  similar  emotions  simultaneously,  then  and  then 
only  do  they  understand  one  another.    The  proverbial  philosophy 
of  the  people  knows  this  very  well:     "A  full  man  does  not 
understand  a  hungry  one,"  it  says:  "A  drunkard  is  no  com- 
rade for  a  sober  man."     "One  rogue  recognizes  another." 

In  this  mutual  understanding,  or  in  the  illusion  of  mutual  un- 
derstanding—in this  immersion  in  similar  emotions— lies  one  of 
the  principal  charms  of  love.     The  French  novelist,  de  Mau- 


226  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

passant  has  written  very  delightfully  about  this  in  his  little  story 
"  Solitude."  The  same  illusion  explains  the  secret  power  of  alcohol 
over  the  human  soul,  for  alcohol  creates  the  illusion  of  a  com- 
munion о  souls,  and  induces  similar  fantasies  simultaneously,  in 
two  or  several  men. 

Emotions  are  the  stained  glass  windows  of  the  soul;  colored 
glasses  through  which  the  soul  looks  at  the  world.  Each  such 
glass  assists  in  finding  in  the  contemplated  object  the  same  or 
similar  colors,  but  it  also  prevents  the  finding  of  opposite  ones. 
Therefore  it  has  been  correctly  said  that  a  one-sided  emotional 
illumination  cannot  give  a  correct  perception  of  an  object.  Noth- 
ing gives  one  such  a  clear  idea  of  things  as  the  emotions,  yet 
nothing  deludes  one  so  much. 

Every  emotion  has  a  meaning  for  its  existence,  although  its 
value  from  the  standpoint  of  knowledge  varies.  Certain  emotions 
are  important  and  necessary  for  the  life  of  knowledge  and  certain 
emotions  hinder  rather  than  help  one  to  understand. 

Theoretically  all  emotions  are  an  aid  to  knowledge;  all  emo- 
tions arose  because  of  the  knowing  of  one  or  another  thing.  Let  us 
consider  one  of  the  most  elementary  emotions — say  the  emotion 
of  fear.  Undoubtedly  there  are  relations  which  can  be  known 
only  through  fear.  The  man  who  never  experienced  the  sensation 
of  fear  will  never  understand  many  things  in  life  and  in  nature;  he 
will  never  understand  many  of  the  controlling  motives  in  the  life 
of  man.  (What  else  but  the  fear  of  hunger  and  cold  forces  the 
majority  of  men  to  work?)  He  will  never  understand  many 
things  in  the  animal  world.  For  example,  he  will  not  understand 
the  relation  of  mammals  to  reptiles.  A  snake  excites  a  feeling  of 
repulsion  and  fear  in  all  mammals.  By  this  repulsion  and  fear 
the  mammal  knows  the  nature  of  the  snake  and  the  relation  of 
that  nature  to  its  own,  and  knows  it  correctly,  but  strictly  per- 
sonally, and  only  from  its  own  standpoint.  But  what  the  snake 
is  in  itself  the  animal  never  knows  by  the  emotion  of  fear.  What 
the  snake  is  in  itself — not  in  the  philosophical  meaning  of  the 
thing-in-itself  (nor  from  the  standpoint  of  the  man  or  animal 
whom  it  has  bitten  or  may  bite)  but  simply  from  the  standpoint  of 

Zoology THIS  CAN  BE  KNOWN  BY  THE  INTELLECT  ONLY. 

Emotions  unite  with  the  different  I's  of  our  consciousness. 
Emotions  apparently  the  same  may  be  united  with  the  very  small 
I's  of  the  lowest  planes  of  consciousness,  and  with  the  very  great 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  227 

and  lofty  I's  of  the  soul  and  spirit;  and  correspondingly  the  role 
and  meaning  of  this  emotion  in  life  may  be  very  different.  The 
continual  shifting  of  emotions,  each  of  which  calls  itself  I,  and 
strives  to  establish  power  over  man  is  the  chief  obstacle  to  the 
establishment  of  a  constant  I.  And  particularly  does  this  inter- 
fere when  the  emotions  are  manifesting  in  and  passing  through 
the  lowest  regions  of  the  psyche.  These  are  the  so-called  personal 
emotions.  This  term  is  not  quite  accurate,  because  these  emotions 
pertain  more  to  the  body  and  to  the  outer  world  than  to  the  person- 
ality in  the  strict  sense  of  this  word.  It  would  be  more  correct  to 
call  by  the  name  of  personal  emotions  the  emotions  of  the  soul  and 
spirit,  i.  е.,  belonging  to  the  true  personality  of  the  man.  But 
ordinarily  this  name  is  given  to  the  emotions  of  the  lowest  regions 
of  the  psyche.  The  matter  may  also  be  explained  in  this  way: 
emotions  on  the  higher  planes  know  that  they  are  not  the  per- 
sonality (although  they  are  nearer  to  the  personality),  while  on 
the  lower  planes  they  assume  the  appearance  of  the  personality 
and  impose  themselves  as  such — create  a  pseudo-personality,  as 
it  were. 

The  sign  of  the  growth  of  the  emotions — this  is  the  liberation 
of  them  from  the  pseudo-personal  element,  and  their  sublimation 
on  the  higher  planes.  The  liberation  from  pseudo-personal  ele- 
ments augments  the  cognizing  power  of  the  emotions,  because  the 
more  there  are  of  pseudo-personal  elements  in  emotion  the  greater 
the  possibility  of  delusion.  Pseudo-personal  emotion  is  always 
partial,  always  unjust,  by  reason  of  the  one  fact  that  it  opposes 
itself  to  all  the  rest. 

Thus  the  cognitive  power  of  the  emotions  is  greater  in  propor- 
tion as  there  is  less  of  self-elements  in  a  given  emotion,  i.  е.,  more 
consciousness  that  this  emotion  is  not  the  I. 

We  have  seen  before,  in  studying  space  and  its  laws,  that  the 
evolution  of  knowledge  consists  in  a  gradual  withdrawing  from 
oneself.  Hinton  expresses  this  very  well.  He  says  that  only  by 
withdrawing  from  ourselves  do  we  begin  to  comprehend  the  world 
as  it  is.  The  entire  system  of  mental  exercises  with  colored  cubes 
invented  by  Hinton  aims  at  the  training  of  consciousness  to  look 
at  things  from  other  than  the  pseudo-personal  standpoint. 

When  we  study  a  block  of  cubes,  writes  Hinton,  (say  a  cube  consisting 
of  27  lesser  cubes)  we  first  of  all  learn  it  by  starting  from  a  particular 
cube  and  axis,  and  learning  how  26  others  come  with  regard  to  that 


228  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

cube.  .  .  We  learn  the  block  with  regard  to  this  axis,  so  that  we  can 
mentally  conceive  the  disposition  of  every  cube  as  it  comes  regarded 
from  one  point  of  view.  Next  we  suppose  ourselves  to  be  in  another 
cube  at  the  extremity  of  another  axis;  and  looking  from  this  axis,  we 
learn  the  aspect  of  all  the  cubes,  and  so  on. 

Thus  we  impress  on  the  feelings  what  the  block  of  cubes  is  like  from 
every  axis.    In  this  way  we  get  a  knowledge  of  the  block  of  cubes. 

Now,  to  get  the  knowledge  of  humanity,  we  must  study  it  from  the 
standpoints  of  the  individuals  composing  it. 

The  egotist  may  be  compared  with  the  man  who  knows  a  cube  from  one 
standpoint  only. 

Those  who  feel  superficially  with  a  great  many  people,  are  like  those 
learners  who  have  a  slight  acquaintance  with  a  block  of  cubes  from  many 
points  of  view. 

Those  who  have  a  few  deep  attachments  are  like  those  who  know 
them  well  from  only  one  or  two  points  of  view. 

And  after  all,  perhaps  the  difference  between  the  good  and  the  rest  of 
us,  lies  rather  in  the  former  being  aware.  There  is  something  outside 
them  which  draws  them  to  it,  which  they  see,  while  we  do  not* 

Just  as  it  is  incorrect  in  relation  to  oneself  to  evaluate  every- 
thing from  the  standpoint  of  one  emotion,  contrasting  it  with  all 
the  rest,  so  is  it  correspondingly  incorrect  in  relation  to  the 
world  and  men  to  evaluate  everything  from  the  standpoint  of 
one's  own  I,  contrasting  oneself  with  the  rest. 

Thus  the  problem  of  correct  emotional  knowledge  consists  in 
the  fact  that  one  shall  feel  in  relation  to  the  world  and  men  from 
some  standpoint  other  than  the  personal,  shall  feel  not  only  for  one- 
self, but  also  for  others.  And  the  broader  the  circle  becomes  for 
which  a  person  feels,  the  deeper  becomes  the  knowledge  which  his 
emotions  yield.  But  not  all  emotions  are  of  equal  potency  in 
liberating  from  self -elements.  Certain  emotions  from  their  very 
nature  are  disruptive,  separative,  alienating,  forcing  man  to  feel 
himself  as  individualized  and  separate;  such  are  hatred,  fear, 
jealousy,  pride,  envy.  These  are  emotions  of  a  materialistic 
order,  forcing  a  belief  in  matter.  And  there  are  emotions  which 
are  unitive,  harmonizing,  making  man  feel  himself  to  be  a  part  of 
some  great  whole;  such  are  love,  sympathy,  friendship,  com- 
passion, love  of  country,  love  of  nature,  love  of  humanity.  These 
emotions  lead  man  out  of  the  material  world  and  show  him  the 
truth  of  the  world  of  the  wondrous.  Emotions  of  this  character 
liberate  him  more  easily  from  self-elements  than  those  of  the 
former  class.    Nevertheless  there  can  be  a  quite  impersonal  pride — 

*  С.  H.  Hinton,  "A  New  Era  of  Thought."  pp.  77,  78. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  229 

the  pride  in  an  heroic  deed  accomplished  by  another  man.  There 
can  even  be  impersonal  envy,  when  we  envy  a  man  who  has  con- 
quered himself,  conquered  his  personal  desire  to  live,  sacrificed 
himself  for  that  which  everyone  considers  to  be  right  and  just,  but 
which  we  cannot  bring  ourselves  to  do,  cannot  even  think  of  doing, 
because  of  weakness,  of  love  of  life.  There  can  be  impersonal  hatred 
— of  injustice,  of  brute  force,  anger  against  stupidity,  dullness; 
aversion  to  nastiness,  to  hypocrisy.  These  feelings  undoubtedly 
elevate  and  purify  the  soul  of  man  and  help  him  to  see  things 
which  he  would  not  otherwise  see. 

Christ  driving  the  money-changers  out  of  the  temple  or  ex- 
pressing his  opinion  about  the  Pharisees,  was  not  entirely  meek 
and  mild;  and  there  are  cases  wherein  meekness  and  mildness  are 
not  virtues  at  all.  Emotions  of  love,  sympathy,  pity,  transform 
themselves  very  readily  into  sentimentality,  into  weakness;  and 
thus  transformed  they  contribute  of  course  to  nescience,  i.  е., 
matter.  

There  is  a  division  of  emotions  into  pure  and  impure.  We  all 
know  this,  we  all  use  these  words,  but  understand  little  of  what 
they  mean.  Truly,  what  does  "pure"  and  "dirty"  or  "impure" 
mean  with  reference  to  feeling? 

Common  morality  divides,  a  priori,  all  emotions  into  pure  and 
impure  according  to  certain  outward  signs,  just  as  Noah  divided 
the  animals  in  his  ark.  All  "fleshly  desires"  fall  into  the  category 
of  the  "impure."  But  I  have  already  presented  the  idea  of  V.  V. 
Rosanoff  about  the  latter,  that  in  asceticism  the  idea  of  abomina- 
tion derives  from  sexual  perversion.  In  reality  indeed,  "fleshly 
desires"  are  just  as  pure  as  is  everything  in  nature.  Nevertheless 
emotions  are  pure  and  impure.  We  know  very  well  that  there  is 
truth  in  this  classification.    But  where  is  it,  and  what  does  it  mean? 

Only  an  analysis  of  emotions  from  the  standpoint  of  knowledge 
can  give  the  key  to  this. 

Impure  emotion — this  is  quite  the  same  thing  as  impure  glass, 
impure  water,  or  impure  sound,  i.  е.,  emotion  which  is  not  pure, 
but  containing  sediments,  deposits,  or  echoes  of  other  emotions: 
impure — mixed.  Impure  emotion  gives  obscure,  not  pure  knowl- 
edge, just  as  impure  glass  gives  a  confused  image.  Pure  emotion 
gives  a  clear  pure  image  of  that  for  the  knowledge  of  which  it  is 
intended. 


230  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

This  is  the  only  possible  decision  of  the  question.  The  arrival 
at  this  conclusion  saves  us  from  the  common  mistake  of  moralists 
who  divide  arbitrarily  all  emotion  into  "moral"  and  "immoral." 
But  if  we  try  for  a  moment  to  separate  emotions  from  their  usual 
moral  frames,  then  we  see  that  matters  are  considerably  simpler, 
that  there  are  no  in  their  nature  pure  emotions,  nor  impure  in  their 
nature,  but  that  each  emotion  will  be  pure  or  impure  according  to 
whether  or  not  there  are  admixtures  of  other  emotions  in  it. 

There  can  be  a  pure  sensuality,  the  sensuality  of  the  "Song  of 
Songs,"  which  initiates  into  the  sensation  of  cosmic  life  and  gives 
the  power  to  hear  the  beating  pulse  of  nature.  And  there  can  be 
an  impure  sensuality — something  useless  and  aimless,  mixed  with 
the  sense  of  sin  and  shame,  i.  е.,  with  a  consciousness  of  its  use- 
lessness. 

There  can  be  pure  sympathy,  and  there  can  be  sympathy 
mixed  with  calculation  to  receive  something  for  one's  sympathy. 
There  can  be  pure  love  of  knowledge,  a  thirst  for  knowledge  for 
its  own  sake,  and  there  can  be  an  inclination  to  knowledge  wherein 
considerations  of  utility  or  profit  assume  the  chief  importance. 

In  their  outer  manifestation  pure  and  impure  emotions  may 
differ  very  little.  Two  men  may  be  playing  chess,  acting  out- 
wardly very  similarly,  but  in  one  will  burn  self-love,  desire  of 
victory,  and  he  will  be  full  of  different  unpleasant  feelings  toward 
his  rival — fear,  envy  of  a  clever  move,  spite,  jealousy,  animosity, 
or  schemes  to  win;  while  the  other  will  simply  solve  a  complex 
mathematical  problem  which  lies  before  him,  not  thinking  about 
his  rival  at  all. 

The  emotion  of  the  first  man  will  be  impure,  if  only  because  it 
contains  much  of  the  mixed.  The  emotion  of  the  second  will  be 
pure.  The  meaning  of  this  is  of  course  perfectly  clear.  In  the 
first  case  the  emotion  dwells  on  the  lower  psychical  plane.  In  the 
second  case  it  dwells  on  the  intellectual,  i.  е.,  on  the  higher 
psychical  plane  wherefrom  it  is  easily  translated  into  the  emotions 
of  the  soul,  in  the  true  sense  of  this  word. 

Examples  of  a  similar  division  of  outwardly  similar  emotions 
may  be  constantly  seen  in  the  aesthetic,  literary,  scientific,  public 
and  even  the  spiritual  and  religious  activities  of  men.  In  all 
regions  of  this  activity  only  complete  victory  over  the  pseudo- 
personal  element  leads  a  man  to  the  correct  understanding  of  the 
world  and  of  himself.     All  emotions  colored  by  false  self-ele- 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  231 

ments  are  like  concave,  convex,  or  otherwise  curved  glasses, 
which  refract  rays  incorrectly  and  distort  the  image  of  the  world. 
Therefore  the  problem  of  emotional  knowledge  consists  in  a 
corresponding  preparation  of  the  emotions  which  serve  as  organs 
of  knowledge. 

Become  as  little  children  .  .  and 
Blessed  are  the  pure  in  heart.  .  . 

In  these  evangelical  words  is  expressed  the  idea  of  the  purifica- 
tion of  the  emotions.  It  is  impossible  to  know  through  impure 
emotions.  Therefore  in  the  interests  of  a  correct  understanding 
of  the  world  and  of  the  self,  man  should  undertake  the  purifica- 
tion and  the  elevation  of  his  emotions. 

This  last  leads  to  an  entirely  new  view  of  morality.  That 
morality  the  aim  of  which  is  to  establish  a  system  of  correct  rela- 
tions toward  the  emotions,  and  to  assist  in  their  purification  and 
elevation,  ceases  in  our  eyes  to  be  some  wearisome  and  self- 
limiting  exercise  in  virtue.    Morality — this  is  a  form  of  esthetics. 

That  which  is  not  moral  is  first  of  all  not  beautiful,  because  not 
concordant,  not  harmonious. 

We  see  all  the  enormous  meaning  that  morality  may  have  in 
our  life;  we  see  the  meaning  morality  has  for  knowledge  for  the 
reason  that  there  are  emotions  by  which  we  know,  and  there  are 
emotions  by  which  we  delude  ourselves.  If  morality  can  actually 
help  us  to  analyze  these,  then  its  value  is  indisputable  from  the 
standpoint  of  knowledge. 

Current  popular  psychology  knows  very  well  that  malice, 
hatred,  anger,  jealousy  blind  a  man,  darken  his  reason;  it  knows 
that  fear  drives  one  insane,  etc.,  etc. 

But  we  also  know  that  every  emotion  may  serve  either  to  knowl- 
edge or  to  nescience. 

Let  us  consider  such  an  emotion — valuable  and  capable  of  high 
development — as  the  pleasure  of  activity.  This  emotion  is  a  power- 
ful motive  force  in  culture,  and  of  service  in  the  perfection  of  life 
and  in  the  evolution  of  all  higher  faculties  of  man.  But  it  is  also 
the  cause  of  an  infinite  number  of  his  delusions  and  faux  pas 
for  which  he  afterwards  pays  bitterly.  In  the  passion  of  ac- 
tivity man  is  easily  inclined  to  forget  the  aim  that  started  him  to 
act;  to  accept  the  activity  itself  for  the  aim,  and  even  to  sacrifice 
the  aim  in  order  to  preserve  the  activity.    This  is  seen  with  espe- 


232  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

cial  clearness  in  the  activity  of  various  spiritual  movements. 
Man,  starting  out  in  one  direction,  turns  in  the  opposite  one  with- 
out himself  noticing  it,  and  often  descends  into  the  abyss  thinking 
that  he  is  scaling  the  heights. 

There  is  nothing  more  contradictory,  more  paradoxical  than 
the  man  who  is  enticed  away  by  activity.  We  have  become  so  ac- 
customed to  "man"  that  the  strange  perversions  to  which  he  is 
sometimes  subject  fail  to  startle  us  as  curiosities. 

Violence  in  the  name  of  freedom;  violence  in  the  name  of  love; 
the  Gospel  of  Christianity  with  sword  in  hand;  the  stakes  of  the 
Inquisition  for  the  glory  of  a  God  of  Mercy;  the  oppression  of 
thought  and  speech  on  the  part  of  the  ministers  of  religion — all 
these  are  incarnated  absurdities  of  which  humanity  is  capable  by 
reason  of  its  own  strange  duality* 

A  correct  understanding  of  morality  can  preserve  us  in  some 
degree  from  such  perversions  of  thought.  In  our  life  in  general 
there  is  not  much  of  morality.  European  culture  has  gone  along 
the  path  of  intellectual  development.  The  intellect  invented  and 
organized  without  considering  the  moral  meaning  of  its  own  ac- 
tivity. Out  of  this  arose  the  situation  that  the  crown  of  European 
culture  is  the  "dreadnaught." 

Many  people  realize  all  this,  and  on  account  of  it  assume  a 
negative  attitude  to  all  culture.  But  this  is  unjust.  European 
culture  created  much  besides  dreadnaughts  that  is  new  and  val- 
uable, facilitating  life.  The  elaboration  of  the  principles  of  free- 
dom and  right;  the  abolition  of  slavery  (though  these  are  indeed 
nominal) ;  the  victory  of  man  in  many  regions  where  nature  pre- 
sented to  him  a  hostile  front;  the  methods  for  the  distribution  of 
thought,  the  press;  the  miracles  of  contemporary  medicine  and 
surgery — all  these  are  indisputably  real  conquests,  and  it  is  im- 
possible not  to  take  them  into  consideration.  But  there  is  no  mor- 
ality in  them.  The  man  of  European  culture  invents  with  equal 
readiness  a  machine  gun  and  a  new  surgical  apparatus.  European 
culture  began  from  the  life  of  the  savage,  taking  this  life  as  an  ex- 
ample as  it  were  and  starting  to  develop  all  its  sides  to  the  utter- 
most without  thinking  of  their  moral  aspects.  The  savage  crushed 
the  head  of  his  enemy  with  a  simple  club.  We  invented  for  this 
purpose  complicated  devices,  making  possible  the  crushing  of 
hundreds  and  thousands  of  heads  at  once.  Therefore  such  a  thing 
as  this  happened:  aerial  navigation,  toward  which  men  had  looked 

*  Concerning  this  duality,  see  later  in  regard  to  the  two  races  or  species  of  "men."  Chapter  XXIII 
and  the  table  of  "Forms  of  Consciousness." 


TERTITJM  ORGANUM  233 

forward  for  millenniums,  finally  achieved,  is  used  first  of  all  for 
purposes  of  war. 

Morality:  this  is  the  co-ordination  and  the  necessity  for  co-or- 
dination of  all  sides  of  life  with  the  higher  emotions  and  the  higher 
comprehensions  of  the  intellect.  From  this  point  of  view  the 
statement  previously  made,  that  morality  is  a  form  of  esthetics, 
becomes  clear.  Esthetics — the  sense  of  beauty — is  the  sensation  of 
the  relation  of  parts  to  a  whole,  and  the  perception  of  the  neces- 
sity for  a  certain  harmonious  relation.  And  morality  is  the  same. 
Those  actions,  thoughts  and  feelings  are  not  moral  which  are  not 
co-ordinated,  which  are  not  harmonious  with  the  higher  under- 
standing and  the  higher  sensations  accessible  to  man.  The  intro- 
duction of  morality  into  our  life  would  make  it  less  paradoxical, 
less  contradictory,  more  logical  and — most  important — more 
civilized;  because  now  our  vaunted  civilization  is  much  compro- 
mised by  "dreadnaughts,"  i.  е.,  war  and  everything  that  goes  with 
it,  as  well  as  many  things  of  "peaceful"  life  such  as  the  death 
penalty,  prisons,  etc. 

Morality,  or  moral  esthetics  in  such  a  sense  as  is  here  shown,  is 
necessary  to  us.  "Without  it  we  too  easily  forget  that  the  word  has 
after  all  a  certain  relation  to  the  act.  We  are  interested  in  many 
things,  we  enter  into  many  things,  but  for  some  strange  reason  we 
fail  to  note  the  incongruity  between  our  spiritual  life  and  our  life 
on  earth.  Thus  we  create  two  lives.  In  one  we  are  preternat- 
urally  strict  with  ourselves,  analyze  with  great  care  every  idea 
before  we  discuss  it ;  in  the  other  we  permit  with  extreme  ease  any 
compromises,  and  easily  keep  from  seeing  that  which  we  do  not 
care  to  see.  Moreover,  we  reconcile  ourselves  to  this  division. 
We  do  not  find  it  necessary  seriously  to  introduce  into  our  lives 
our  higher  ideals,  and  almost  accept  as  a  principle  the  division 
of  the  "real"  from  the  "spiritual."  All  of  the  indecencies  of 
our  life  have  arisen  as  a  result  of  this;  all  of  those  infinite  falsifi- 
cations of  our  life — falsifications  of  the  press,  art,  drama,  science, 
politics — falsifications  in  which  we  suffocate  as  in  a  fetid  swamp, 
but  which  we  ourselves  create,  because  we  and  none  other  are 
servants  and  ministers  of  those  falsifications.  We  have  no  sense  of 
the  necessity  to  introduce  our  ideas  into  life,  to  introduce  them 
into  our  daily  activity,  and  we  even  admit  the  possibility  that  this 
activity  may  go  counter  to  our  spiritual  quests,  in  accordance  with 
one  of  those  established  standards  the  harm  of  which  we  recognize, 


234  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

but  for  which  no  one  holds  himself  responsible  because  he  did  not 
create  them  himself.  We  have  no  sense  of  personal  responsibility, 
no  boldness,  and  we  are  even  without  the  consciousness  of  their 
necessity.  All  this  would  be  very  sad  and  hopeless  if  the  concept 
"we"  were  not  so  dubious.  In  reality,  the  correctness  of  the  very 
expression  "we"  is  subject  to  grave  doubt.  The  enormous  ma- 
jority of  the  population  of  this  globe  is  engaged  in  effect  in  de- 
stroying, disfiguring,  and  falsifying  the  ideas  of  the  minority.  The 
majority  is  without  ideas.  It  is  incapable  of  understanding  the 
ideas  of  the  minority,  and  left  to  itself  it  must  inevitably  disfigure 
and  destroy.  Imagine  a  menagerie  full  of  monkeys.  In  this 
menagerie  a  man  is  working.  The  monkeys  observe  his  move- 
ments and  try  to  imitate  him  but  they  can  imitate  only  his  visible 
movements,  the  meaning  and  aim  of  these  movements  are  closed 
to  them;  therefore  their  actions  will  have  quite  another  result. 
And  should  the  monkeys  escape  from  their  cages  and  get  hold  of 
the  man's  tools,  then  perhaps  they  will  destroy  all  his  work,  and 
inflict  great  damage  on  themselves  as  well.  But  they  will  never 
be  able  to  create  anything.  Therefore  a  man  would  make  a  great 
mistake  if  he  referred  to  their  "work,"  and  spoke  of  them  as 
we. 

Creation  and  destruction — or  more  correctly,  the  ability  to 
create  or  the  ability  only  to  destroy — these  are  the  principal  signs 
of  the  two  types,  or  races  of  men.  Morality  is  necessary  to  us. 
Only  by  regarding  everything  from  the  standpoint  of  morality  is 
it  possible  to  differentiate  unmistakably  the  work  of  man  from  the 
activity  of  apes.  But  at  the  same  time  delusions  are  nowhere 
more  easily  created  than  in  the  region  of  morality.  Allured  by 
his  own  particular  morality  and  moral  gospel,  a  man  forgets  the 
aim  of  moral  perfection,  forgets  that  this  aim  consists  in  knowl- 
edge. He  begins  to  see  an  aim  in  morality  itself.  Then  occurs  the 
a  priori  division  of  the  emotions  into  good  and  bad,  "moral"  and 
"immoral."  The  correct  understanding  of  the  aim  and  meaning 
of  the  emotions  is  lost  along  with  this.  Man  is  charmed  with  his 
"niceness."  He  desires  that  everyone  else  should  be  just  as  nice 
as  he,  or  as  that  remote  ideal  created  by  himself.  Then  appears 
delight  in  morality  for  morality's  sake,  a  sort  of  moral  sport — the 
exercise  of  morality  for  morality's  sake.  A  man  under  these 
circumstances  begins  to  be  afraid  of  everything.  Everywhere,  in 
all  manifestations  of  life,  something  "immoral"  begins  to  appear 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  235 

to  him,  threatening  to  dethrone  him  or  others  from  that  height  to 
which  they  have  risen  or  may  rise.  This  develops  a  preternat- 
urally  suspicious  attitude  toward  the  morality  of  others.  In  an 
ardor  of  proselytism,  desiring  to  popularize  his  moral  views,  he 
begins  quite  definitely  to  regard  everything  which  is  not  in  accord 
with  his  morality  as  hostile  to  it.  All  this  becomes  "black"  in 
his  eyes.  Starting  with  the  idea  of  utter  freedom,  by  arguments, 
by  compromises,  he  very  easily  convinces  himself  that  it  is 
necessary  to  fight  freedom.  He  already  begins  to  admit  a  certain 
censure  of  thought.  The  free  expression  of  opinions  contrary 
to  his  own  seems  to  him  inadmissible.  All  this  may  be  done 
with  the  best  intentions,  but  the  results  of  it  are  very  well  known. 

There  is  no  tyranny  more  ferocious  than  the  tyranny  of  moral- 
ity. Everything  is  sacrificed  to  it.  And  of  course  there  is  nothing 
so  blinding  as  such  tyranny,  as  such  "morality." 

Nevertheless  humanity  needs  morality,  but  of  a  different  kind — 
such  as  is  founded  on  the  real  data  of  superior  knowledge.  Hu- 
manity is  passionately  seeking  for  this,  and  perhaps  will  find  it. 
Then  on  the  basis  of  this  new  morality  will  occur  a  great  division, 
and  those  few  who  will  be  able  to  follow  it  will  begin  to  rule  others, 
or  they  will  disappear  altogether.  In  any  case,  because  of  this  new 
morality  and  those  forces  which  it  will  engender,  the  contradic- 
tions of  life  will  disappear,  and  those  biped  animals  which  consti- 
tute the  majority  of  humanity  will  have  no  opportunity  to  pose 
as  men  any  longer. 

The  organized  forms  of  intellectual  knowledge  are:  science, 
founded  upon  observation,  calculation  and  experience;  and 
philosophy,  founded  upon  the  speculative  method  of  reasoning  and 
drawing  conclusions. 

The  organized  form  of  emotional  knowledge  are:  religion  and 
art.  Religious  teachings,  taking  on  the  character  of  different 
"cults"  are  founded  entirely  upon  the  emotional  nature  of  man. 
Magnificent  temples,  the  gorgeous  vestments  of  priests  and 
acolytes,  the  solemn  ritual  of  worship,  processions,  sacrifices, 
singing,  music — all  these  have  as  their  aim  the  attuning  of  man  in 
a  certain  way,  the  evoking  in  him  of  certain  definite  feelings.  The 
same  purpose  is  served  by  religious  myths,  legends,  stories  of  the 
lives  of  heroes  and  saints,  prophesies,  apocalypses — these  all  act 
upon  the  imagination,  upon  the  feelings. 


236  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

The  aim  of  it  is  to  give  God  to  man,  to  give  him  morality,  i.  е.,  to 
give  him  a  certain  knowledge  of  the  mysterious  side  of  the  world. 
Religion  may  deviate  from  its  true  aim,  may  serve  earthly  inter- 
ests and  purposes,  but  its  foundation  is  the  search  for  truth,  for 
God. 

Art  serves  beauty,  i.  е.,  emotional  knowledge  of  its  own  kind. 
Art  discovers  beauty  in  everything,  and  compels  man  to  feel  it  and 
therefore  to  know.  Art  is  a  powerful  instrument  of  knowledge  of 
the  noumenal  world :  mysterious  depths,  each  one  more  amazing 
than  the  last,  open  to  the  vision  of  man  when  he  holds  in  his  hands 
this  magical  key.  But  let  him  only  think  that  this  mystery  is  not 
for  knowledge  but  for  pleasure  in  it,  and  all  the  charm  disappears 
at  once.  Just  as  soon  as  art  begins  to  take  delight  in  that  beauty 
which  is  already  found,  instead  of  the  search  for  new  beauty  an 
arrestment  occurs  and  art  becomes  a  superfluous  estheticism,  en- 
compassing man's  vision  like  a  wall.  The  aim  of  art  is  the  search 
for  beauty,  just  as  the  aim  of  religion  is  the  search  for  God  and 
truth.  And  exactly  as  art  stops,  so  religion  stops  also  as  soon  as 
it  ceases  to  search  for  God  and  truth,  thinking  it  has  found  them. 
This  idea  is  expressed  in  the  precept:  Seek  .  .  .  the  kingdom 
of  God  and  his  righteousness   .    .    . 


Science,  philosophy,  religion,  art — these  are  forms  of  knowl- 
edge. The  method  of  science  is  experiment;  the  method  of 
philosophy  is  speculation;  the  method  of  religion  and  art  is  moral 
or  esthetic  emotional  inspiration.  But  both  science  and  philos- 
ophy, religion  and  art,  begin  to  serve  true  knowledge  only  when 
intuition  commences  to  manifest  in  them,  and  by  intuition  is 
meant  the  sensing  and  finding  of  some  inner  property  in  things. 
In  general  it  is  quite  possible  to  say — and  perhaps  it  will  be  most 
true  to  fact — that  the  aim  of  even  purely  intellectual  systems  of 
philosophy  and  science  consists  not  at  all  in  the  giving  to  man 
of  certain  data  of  knowledge,  but  in  the  raising  of  man  to  such  a 
height  of  thinking  and  feeling  as  to  enable  him  to  pass  to  those  new 
and  higher  forms  of  knowledge  to  which  art  and  religion  approach 
more  nearly. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

The  intellectual  method.  Objective  and  subjective  knowledge.  The 
study  of  the  Not-I,  and  the  study  of  the  I.  Impossibility  of  the  ob- 
jective study  of  the  I.  The  limits  of  objective  knowledge.  The 
possibility  of  the  expansion  of  subjective  knowledge.  The  absorp- 
tion of  all  Not-I  by  the  I.  The  ideas  of  Plotinus.  Different  forms 
of  consciousness.  Sleep  (the  potential  state  of  consciousness). 
Dreams  (consciousness  enclosed  in  itself,  reflected  from  itself). 
Waking  consciousness  (dualistic  sensation  of  the  world,  the  divi- 
sion of  the  I  and  the  Not-I).  Ecstacy  (the  liberation  of  the  Self) 
"  Turiya"  (the  absolute  consciousness  of  all,  as  of  the  self).  "The 
dewdrop  slips  into  the  shining  sea."    "Nirvana." 

AVTNG  established  the  principle  of  the  possible  unifi  - 
cation  of  the  forms  of  our  knowledge  in  the  intuition 
or  by  aid  of  the  intuition,  let  us  discover  if  this  unifica- 
tion is  not  somewhere  realized;  how  it  may  be  realized; 
and  whether  it  will  be  realized  in  a  form  entirely  new, 
or  in  one  of  the  existing  forms  which  shall  include  all  others  in  itself. 

For  this  we  shall  return  to  the  fundamental  principles  of  our 
knowledge,  and  compare  the  possible  chances  for  the  development 
of  different  paths,  i.  е.,  we  shall  try  to  find  out  as  best  we  may 
that  path  which  leads  to  intuition,  and  in  the  shortest  time. 

Up  to  a  certain  point  we  have  already  established  this  regard- 
ing the  emotional  path;  the  growth  of  the  emotions,  their  purifica- 
tion and  their  liberation  from  the  materialistic  elements  of  posses- 
sion and  fear  of  loss,  must  lead  to  super-personal  knowledge  and 
to  intuition. 

But  how  can  the  intellectual  path  lead  to  intuition? 

We  realize  that  all  we  know  intellectually  we  know  either 
subjectively  or  objectively — subjectively  as  part  of  ourselves;  ob- 
jectively as  part  of  that  which  is  not  ourselves. 

Let  us  find  out  which  knowledge,  the  subjective  or  the  objective, 
contains  the  greater  possibility  of  development,  and  which  can 
lead  the  more  quickly  to  intuition. 

First  of  all,  what  is  intuition? 

Intuition  is  direct  knowledge,  by  an  inner  sense,  directly  by 
consciousness.    I  feel  my  own  pain  directly;  intuition  can  give  me 

237 


238  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

the  power  to  sense,  as  mine,  the  pain  of  another  man.  Thus  intui- 
tion is  in  itself  the  expansion  of  subjective  knowledge.  But  perhaps 
the  intuitive  expansion  of  objective  knowledge  is  possible  also. 
Let  us  analyze  the  nature  of  objective  knowledge. 

Our  objective  knowledge  is  contained  in  science  and  philosophy. 
Subjective  experience  science  has  always  regarded  as  a  thing  given, 
which  cannot  be  changed,  but  as  something  "doubtful,"  standing 
in  need  of  verification  and  affirmation  by  the  objective  method. 
Science  has  studied  the  world  as  an  objective  phenomenon,  and  it 
has  striven  to  study  the  I  and  its  properties  as  such  another  ob- 
jective phenomenon. 

In  another  quarter,  the  study  of  the  I  from  the  inside,  so  to 
speak,  was  proceeding  simultaneously  with  this,  but  to  this  study 
no  great  significance  was  ever  attached.  The  limits  of  subjective 
knowledge,  i.  е.,  the  limits  of  the  I  were  considered  to  be  strictly 
definite,  established,  and  unchangeable.  Only  for  objective 
knowledge  was  the  possibility  of  expansion  admitted. 

Let  us  discover  if  there  is  not  some  mistake  here :  is  the  expan- 
sion of  objective  knowledge  really  possible,  and  that  of  subjective 
knowledge  really  limited? 


Developing  science,  i.  е.,  objective  knowledge,  is  encountering 
obstacles  everywhere.  Science  studies  phenomena;  just  as  soon  as 
it  attempts  to  discover  causes,  it  is  confronted  with  the  wall  of  the 
unknown,  and  to  it  unknowable.  The  question  narrows  itself 
down  to  this:  is  this  unknowable  absolutely  unknowable,  or  is  it 
so  only  for  the  objective  methods  of  our  science? 

At  the  present  time  the  situation  is  just  this:  the  number  of 
unknown  facts  in  every  region  of  scientific  knowledge  is  rapidly 
increasing;  and  the  unknown  threatens  to  swallow  the  known — or 
the  accepted  as  known.  One  might  define  the  progress  of  science, 
especially  latterly,  as  a  very  rapid  growth  of  the  regions  of 
nescience. 

Nescience  of  course  existed  before,  and  not  in  less  degree  than 
at  present,  But  before,  it  was  not  so  clearly  recognized — at  that 
time  science  did  not  know  what  it  does  not  know.  Now  it  knows 
this  more  and  more,  and  more  and  more  knows  its  conditionality . 
A  little  more,  and  in  every  separate  branch  of  science  that  which 
it  does  not  know  will  become  greater  than  that  which  it  knows. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  239 

In  every  department  science  itself  is  beginning  to  repudiate  its 
own  foundations.  A  little  more,  and  science  in  its  entirety  will 
ask,  "Where  am  I?" 

Positive  thinking — which  conceived  of  its  problem  as  the 
deducing  of  general  conclusions  from  the  findings  of  each  separate 
science  and  all  of  them  combined — will  feel  itself  compelled  to 
deduce  conclusions  from  that  which  science  does  not  know.  Then 
all  the  world  will  see  before  it  the  colossus  with  feet  of  clay,  or 
rather  without  any  feet  at  all,  but  with  a  formidable  misty  body, 
hanging  in  the  air. 

For  a  long  time  philosophy  has  realized  the  lack  of  feet  of  this 
colossus,  but  the  majority  of  cultivated  mankind  is  still  hypnotized 
by  positivism,  which  sees  something  in  place  of  those  feet.  How- 
ever it  will  be  necessary  to  part  company  with  this  illusion  very 
soon.  Mathematics,  lying  at  the  very  foundation  of  positive 
knowledge  and  to  which  exact  science  always  pointed  with  pride, 
as  to  its  subject  and  vassal,  is  in  reality  now  denying  all  positiv- 
ism, and  establishing  idealism.  Mathematics  was  included  in  the 
cycle  of  positive  sciences  only  by  mistake,  and  soon  indeed  mathe- 
matics will  become  the  principal  weapon  against  positivism. 

By  positivism  I  mean,  in  this  connection,  that  system  which 
affirms,  in  contradiction  to  Kant,  that  the  study  of  phenomena 
can  bring  us  nearer  to  things-in-themselves,  i.  е.,  which  affirms 
that  by  going  along  the  path  of  the  study  of  phenomena  we  can 
come  to  an  understanding  of  causes. 

The  usual  positivistic  view  denies  the  existence  of  the  hidden  side 
of  life,  i.  е.,  it  finds  that  the  hidden  side  opens  to  us  only  little  by 
little — and  that  the  progress  of  science  consists  in  the  gradual 
unveiling  of  the  hidden. 

"This  is  not  known  yet"  says  the  positivist,  when  his  attention 
is  called  to  something  'hidden,'  "but  it  will  be  known.  Science, 
going  by  the  same  path  that  it  has  gone  up  to  now,  will  discover 
this  also.  Five  hundred  years  ago,  Europe  did  not  know  of  the 
existence  of  America;  fifty  years  ago  we  did  not  know  of  the 
existence  of  bacteria;  fifteen  years  ago  we  did  not  know  of  the 
existence  of  radium.  But  America,  bacteria  and  radium  are  all 
discovered  now.  Similarly  and  by  the  same  methods,  and  by 
such  methods  only,  will  be  discovered  everything  that  is  to  be  dis- 
covered. The  apparatuses  are  being  perfected,  the  methods, 
processes  and  observations  are  being  refined.    That  which  we  did 


240  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

not  even  suspect  a  hundred  years  ago,  has  now  become  a  generally 
known  and  generally  understood  fact.  Everything  that  is  possible 
to  be  known  will  become  known  after  this  manner." 

Thus  do  the  adherents  of  the  positivistic  viewpoints  speak, 
but  at  the  foundation  of  these  reasonings  lies  a  deep  delusion. 

The  affirmation  of  positivism  would  be  quite  true  did  posi- 
tivism move  uniformly  in  all  directions  of  the  unknown;  if  sealed 
doors  did  not  exist  for  it;  if  in  the  multitude  of  questions  the 
principal  questions  did  not  remain  just  as  obscure  as  in  those 
times  when  science  did  not  exist  at  all.  We  see  that  enormous 
regions  are  closed  utterly  to  science,  that  it  never  penetrated  into 
them,  and  worst  of  all  it  made  not  a  single  step  in  the  direction  of 
these  regions. 

There  are  multitudes  of  problems  the  solving  of  which  science 
has  not  even  attempted;  problems  in  the  presence  of  which  the  con- 
temporary scientist,  armed  with  all  his  science,  is  as  helpless  as  a 
savage,  or  a  four-year-old  child. 

Such  are  the  problems  of  life  and  death,  the  problems  of  space 
and  time,  the  mystery  of  consciousness,  etc.,  etc. 

We  all  know  this,  and  the  only  thing  we  can  do  is  to  try  not  to 
think  about  the  existence  of  these  problems,  to  forget  about  them. 
We  do  so  as  a  rule,  but  this  does  not  annihilate  them.  They  con- 
tinue to  exist,  and  at  any  given  moment  we  may  turn  to  them 
and  try  on  them  the  rigidity  and  force  of  our  scientific  method. 
And  every  time,  at  such  an  attempt,  we  find  that  our  scientific 
method  is  not  equal  to  these  problems.  By  its  aid  we  can  discover 
the  chemical  composition  of  remote  stars;  can  photograph  the 
skeleton  within  the  human  body,  invisible  to  the  human  eye; 
can  invent  a  floating  mine  which  can  be  controlled  from  a  dis- 
tance by  means  of  electrical  waves,  and  can  in  this  way  anni- 
hilate in  a  moment  hundreds  of  lives;  but  by  the  aid  of  this 
method  we  cannot  tell  what  the  man  standing  beside  us  is  think- 
ing about.  No  matter  how  much  we  may  weigh,  sound  or  photo- 
graph a  man,  we  shall  never  know  his  thoughts  at  a  given  moment, 
unless  he  himself  tells  them  to  us.    Вит  this  is  truly  quite  a 

DIFFERENT  METHOD. 

The  sphere  of  action  of  the  method  of  exact  science  is  strictly 
limited.  This  sphere  is  the  world  of  the  objective.  In  the  world 
of  the  subjective  exact  science  has  never  penetrated  and  will  never 
penetrate. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  241 

The  expansion  of  objective  knowledge  at  the  expense  of  the 
subjective  is  impossible.  In  spite  of  all  the  growth  of  the  objective 
sciences,  the  border  line  between  them  and  the  world  of  the  sub- 
jective remains  in  the  same  place.  Could  science  take  a  single  step 
in  this  direction,  were  it  able  to  explain  something  subjective  in 
terms  of  the  objective,  then  we  might  admit  that  it  could  take  two, 
three,  ten,  and  ten  thousand  steps.  But  it  has  taken  not  even  one, 
and  it  is  therefore  reasonable  to  believe  that  it  will  never  take  it. 
The  world  of  the  subjective  is  closed  to  objective  investigation, 
and  for  this  quite  definite  causes  exist. 

By  no  means  everything  that  exists  has  an  objective  existence, 
i.  е.,  not  everything  can  be  made  objective.  Negative  quantities 
exist,  but  they  do  not  exist  objectively.  Such  logical  concepts  as 
good,  evil,  truth,  beauty,  matter,  motion  and  so  forth  exist  also, 
but  they  do  not  exist  objectively  in  the  sense  that  this  inkstand, 
that  table,  yonder  wall  exist.  All  metaphysical  facts  exist,  but  they 
do  not  exist  objectively. 

Objective  existence  is  a  very  narrowly  defined  form  of  existence, 
and  does  not  by  any  means  exhaust  or  comprehend  existence  as  a 
whole.  The  mistake  of  positivism  consists  in  the  fact  that  it  has 
recognized  as  really  existing  only  that  which  exists  objectively, 
and  it  has  even  begun  to  deny  the  very  existence  of  that  which  is  not 
objective. 

But  what  is  objectivity? 

We  can  define  it  in  this  way:  because  of  the  properties  of  our 
consciousness,  or  because  of  the  conditions  under  which  our  con- 
sciousness works,  we  segregate  a  small  number  of  facts  into  a  defi- 
nite group.  This  group  of  facts  represents  in  itself  the  objective 
world,  and  is  accessible  to  the  investigation  of  science.  But  in  no 
case  does  this  group  represent  in  itself  everything  that  is 
existing. 

Alongside  of  this  group  we  may  place  another  one :  the  group  of 
the  subjective. 

What  is  the  subjective? 

That  which  we  feel  directly.  My  tooth-ache  is  for  me  a  sub- 
jective phenomenon.  Another's  tooth-ache  is  for  me  a  concept 
only.  It  is  true  that  it  is  accompanied  by,  or  has  as  its  cause  the 
objective  phenomenon,  a  decayed  tooth.  But  the  pain  itself, 
when  it  is  someone  else's  pain,  is  only  a  concept.  The  subjective: 
this  is  what  I  feel  myself,  directly  as  part  of  me. 


242  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

The  subjective  constitutes  its  own  separate  group.  In  every 
man  this  group  is  different.  In  one  it  may  be  smaller,  and  in 
another  greater.  For  one,  a  whole  series  of  sensations  (musical 
for  instance)  belongs  to  the  region  of  the  subjective,  for  another 
this  entire  series  remains  a  concept.  Undoubtedly  however,  the 
region  of  the  subjective  may  expand  considerably  by  the  aid  of 
special  education  and  training. 

If  we  take  a  contemporary  average  man,  we  may  say  that 
everything  existing  is  divided  for  him  into  three  groups:  the  ob- 
jective, the  subjective,  and  that  which  is  neither  objective  nor 
subjective,  such  as  a  negative  magnitude,  and  generally  such  facts 
as  are  known  to  him  as  concepts  only. 

The  question  consists  in  this :  by  which  path  will  the  expansion 
of  the  sciences  go,  by  the  path  of  the  objective,  or  by  the  path  of 
the  subjective? 

With  regard  to  a  very  large  class  of  facts,  we  may  boldly  declare 
that  the  expansion  of  objective  science  in  their  direction  is  impossi- 
ble. An  abstract  concept  will  never  become  an  objective  phe- 
nomenon; the  thoughts  of  another  man,  and  my  own,  will  never 
become  for  me  an  objective  phenomenon. 

The  objective  method  is  insufficient  and  unfit  for  the  study  of 
the  phenomena  of  consciousness.  Another  method  is  necessary. 
Everything  points  to  the  fact  that  by  the  positive  method  it  is 
possible  to  advance  in  definite  conditional  directions  only.  Science 
has  not  taken  one  step  in  the  direction  of  the  objective  knowledge 
of  the  subjective,  and  evidently  cannot  take  any  step;  moreover 
objective  knowledge  is  founded  upon  subjective,  and  cannot  exist 
without  it,  though  subjective  knowledge  can  exist  perfectly  with- 
out objective  knowledge.  If  we  strictly  analyze  the  substance  of 
objective  knowledge,  we  shall  see  that  it  consists  of  subjective  ele- 
ments. We  have  already  made,  in  part,  such  an  analysis  in  dis- 
cussing space  and  time.  Extension  in  space  and  existence  in  time 
— this  is  the  first  condition  of  objective  existence.  And  yet  the 
forms  of  the  extension  of  a  thing  in  space,  and  those  of  its  ex- 
istence in  time  are  created  by  the  cognizing  subject,  and  do  not 
belong  to  the  thing  itself.  This  last  consideration  permits  us  to 
part  with  all  the  hypotheses  of  the  five  states  of  matter,  energetic 
and  psycho-physical  emanations,  etc.  All  these  hypotheses  suffer 
from  one  common  defect:  they  do  not  take  into  consideration  the 
fact  that  materiality  or  energism  is  a  complex  property  belonging 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  243 

NOT    TO    THE    THING,    BUT    TO    OUR    RECEPTIVITY    OF    THE    THING. 

Furthermore,  they  do  not  take  into  consideration  that  materiality 
cannot  belong  to  those  things  that  are  not  perceived  by  us  as 
material  things;  just  as  certain  properties  of  materiality  can- 
not belong  to  a  thing  without  certain  others.  Matter  consists  not 
of  atoms,  but  of  our  sensations  of  it.  If  there  are  no  sensations  (or 
at  least  the  possibility  of  them),  then  there  is  no  matter.  Matter 
which  is  imponderable  у  invisible,  without  mass,  etc.,  is  sheer  non- 
sense, as  is  a  carriage  without  wheels,  without  seats,  without 
body,  without  floor,  without  top,  without  doors.  It  will  be 
anything  but  a  carriage.  Matter  is  first  of  all  three  dimensional. 
This  three-dimensionality  is  the  form  of  our  receptivity.  Mat- 
ter of  four  dimensions  is  just  as  impossible  a  thing  as  a  square 
triangle. 

In  order  to  understand  this,  and  not  to  be  attracted  by  the  naive 
spiritistic  and  theosophical  theories  about  fine  states  of  matter,  it 
is  necessary  to  understand  that  all  these  theories  do  not  lead  us 
out  of  the  sphere  of  three  dimensions  and  cannot  lead  us  out.  All 
these  "finer  matters"  are  entirely  three-dimensional,  and  their 
materiality  is  not  diminished  by  their  fineness  at  all. 

What  is  materiality? 

Materiality — this  is  the  condition  of  existence  in  space  and 
time,  i.  е.,  a  condition  of  existence  under  which"  at  one  time,  and 
in  one  place,  two  similar  phenomena  cannot  occur."  This  is  an 
exhaustive  definition  of  materiality.  It  is  clear  that  under  the  con- 
ditions known  to  us,  two  similar  phenomena,  occurring  simul- 
taneously in  one  place,  will  compose  one  phenomenon.  But  this 
is  obligatory  for  those  conditions  of  existence  which  we  know, 
i.  е.,  for  matter.  For  the  universe  it  is  absolutely  not  obligatory. 
We  constantly  observe  the  conditions  of  materiality  in  those 
cases  in  which  we  must  create  in  our  life  a  sequence  of  phenomena 
or  are  obliged  to  select,  because  matter  does  not  permit  us  to 
juxtapose  in  a  definite  interval  of  time,  more  than  a  certain  num- 
ber of  phenomena.  The  necessity  for  selection  is  perhaps  the  chief 
visible  sign  of  materiality.  Outside  of  matter,  the  necessity  for 
selection  is  done  away  with,  and  if  we  imagine  the  life  of  a  feeling 
being  independent  of  the  conditions  of  materiality,  such  a  being 
will  be  capable  of  possessing  simultaneously  such  faculties  as  from 
our  standpoint  are  incompatible,  opposite,  and  eliminative  of  one 
another:  the  power  of  being  in  several  places  at  the  same  time;  to 


244  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

command  different  views;  to  perform  opposite  and  mutually  ex- 
clusive actions  simultaneously. 

In  speaking  of  matter  it  is  necessary  always  to  remember  that 
matter  is  not  a  substance,  but  a  condition.  Suppose  for  example, 
that  a  man  is  blind.  It  is  impossible  to  regard  this  blindness  as  a 
substance;  it  is  a  condition  of  the  existence  of  a  given  man. 
Matter  is  some  sort  of  blindness. 

For  these  reasons  it  is  perfectly  useless  and  naive  to  hope  that 
such  subjective  phenomena  as  thoughts  and  feelings  can  by  any 
possibility  be  shown  to  exist  objectively,  although  only  slightly 
material — thus  reducing  everything  existing  to  the  objectively 
existing.  There  is  objective  knowledge  and  there  is  subjective 
knowledge.  Let  us  now  investigate  the  possibilities  of  progress  in 
the  one  and  in  the  other. 

Objective  knowledge  can  grow  infinitely,  its  progress  depending 
on  the  perfection  of  its  instruments  and  the  refinement  of  its 
methods  of  observation  and  experiment.  One  thing  only  it  cannot 
transcend — the  limits  of  the  three-dimensional  sphere,  i.  е.,  the 
conditions  of  space  and  time,  for  the  reason  that  objective  knowl- 
edge is  created  under  these  conditions,  and  the  conditions  of  the 
existence  of  the  three-dimensional  world  are  the  conditions  of  its 
existence.  Objective  knowledge  will  always  be  subject  to  these 
conditions,  for  otherwise  it  would  cease  to  exist.  No  apparatus, 
no  instrument,  will  ever  conquer  these  conditions,  for  should  they 
conquer  they  would  destroy  themselves  first  of  all.  Perpetual 
motion  would  be  the  only  victory  over  the  three-dimensional 
world  in  the  three-dimensional  world  itself. 

Objective  knowledge  does  not  study  facts,  but  only  the  percep- 
tion of  facts.  Subjective  knowledge  studies  the  facts — the  facts  of 
consciousness,  which  let  us  remember  we  have  found  out  to  be 
the  only  real  facts.  Thus  objective  knowledge  has  to  do  with  the 
unreal,  with  the  reflected,  with  the  imaginary  world:  subjective 
knowledge  has  to  do  with  the  real  world. 

In  order  that  objective  knowledge  shall  transcend  the 
limits  of  the  three-dimensional  sphere,  it  is  necessary 
that  the  conditions  of  subjective  receptivity  shall  change. 

So  long  as  this  does  not  happen,  our  objective  knowledge  is  con- 
fined within  the  limits  of  an  infinite  three-dimensional  sphere.  It 
can  proceed  infinitely  upon  the  radii  of  that  sphere,  but  it  will 
never  penetrate  into  that  region  a  section  of  which  constitutes  our 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  245 

three-dimensional  world.  Moreover  we  know,  from  the  preceding, 
that  should  our  subjective  receptivity  become  more  limited,  then 
objective  knowledge  would  be  correspondingly  limited  also.  It  is 
impossible  to  convey  to  a  dog  the  idea  of  the  sphericality  of  the 
earth;  to  make  it  remember  the  weight  of  the  sun  and  the  distances 
between  the  planets  is  equally  impossible.  Its  objective  knowl- 
edge is  vastly  more  personal  than  ours;  and  the  cause  of  it  lies  in 
the  dog's  more  limited  psyche. 

Thus  we  see  that  objective  knowledge  depends  upon  the  prop- 
erties of  subjective  knowledge.  Or  to  put  it  differently,  the  degree 
of  subjective  knowledge  determines  the  degree  of  objective 
knowledge. 

Indeed,  between  the  objective  knowledge  of  a  savage  and  that 
of  Herbert  Spencer  there  is  an  enormous  difference;  but  that  of 
neither  the  one  nor  the  other  transcends  the  limits  of  the  three- 
dimensional  sphere,  i.  е.,  the  limits  of  the  "conditional"  unreal. 
In  order  to  transcend  the  three-dimensional  sphere,  it  is  necessary 
to  expand  subjective  knowledge.  The  expansion  of  sub- 
jective knowledge  is  the  expansion  of  the  limits  of  the  I,  the  ex- 
pansion of  the  focus  of  consciousness,  the  inclusion  in  it  simul- 
taneously of  many  heterogeneous  I's  which  usually  tend  to 
exclude  one  another. 

Is  the  expansion  of  the  limits  of  the  I  possible? 

The  study  of  complex  forms  of  consciousness  assures  us  that 
it  is  possible.  The  expansion  of  subjective  knowledge — the  ex- 
pansion of  the  limits  of  the  I — means  this :  the  inclusion  in  our  I  of 
that  which  usually  is  perceived  as  Not-I.  The  limits  of  the  I  are 
very  conditional,  and  in  general  indefinite.  Animals,  though  yet 
imperfectly  conscious  of  their  I,  unite  it  with  that  towards  which 
they  are  striving  at  a  given  moment.  Man  limits  his  I  by  his  body. 
Studying  the  world,  he  refers  his  body  to  the  region  of  the  Not-I 
and  accepts  as  the  I  the  inner,  the  knowing  center  only.  With 
the  expansion  of  consciousness  the  expansion  of  the  I  proceeds 
further.  Without  defining  the  matter  more  exactly,  we  may  say 
that  our  sense  of  our  I  changes  with  the  changes  of  the  forms  of 
consciousness. 

Plotinus,  the  famous  Alexandrian  philosopher  (third  century) 
affirmed  that  for  perfect  knowledge  the  subject  and  object  must  be 
united — that  the  rational  agent  and  the  thing  being  comprehended 
must  not  be  separate. 


246  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

"For  that  which  sees  is  itself  the  thing  which  is  seen." — [Select 
Works  of  Plotinus.    Bohn's  Library,  p.  271.] 

Here  it  is  indeed  necessary  to  understand  "to  see"  in  the  sense 
of  intuition. 

But  what  forms  of  consciousness  exist? 

Hindu  philosophy  makes  the  division  into  four  states  of  con- 
sciousness sleep,  dream,  waking,  and  the  state  of  absolute  con- 
sciousness— turiya*   ( The  Ancient  Wisdom,  Annie  Besant.) 

According  to  our  terminology  these  four  states  of  consciousness 
will  be:  the  potential  state  of  consciousness,  consciousness  in 
potentiality  (sleep) ;  the  illusory  state  of  consciousness  (the  vision 
of  dreams),  i.  е.,  no  division  into  I  and  Not-I,  the  objectivisation 
of  one's  forms  of  perception;  then,  "clear  consciousness"  (the 
waking  consciousness),  the  division  into  I  and  Not-I;  and  lastly, 
that  unknown  fourth  state  of  consciousness  about  which  our 
scientific  psychology  has  only  a  very  vague  conception,  ecstasy. 

G.  R.  S.  Mead,  in  the  preface  to  Taylor's  translation  of  Plotinus 
(Bohn's  Library)  correlates  the  terminology  of  Shankaracharya — 
the  leader  of  the  Advaita- Vedanta  school  of  ancient  India — with 
that  of  Plotinus. 

The  first  or  spiritual  state  was  ecstasy ;  from  ecstasy  it  forgot  itself  into 
deep  sleep;  from  profound  sleep  it  awoke  out  of  unconsciousness,  but 
still  within  itself,  into  the  internal  world  of  dreams;  from  dreaming  it 
passed  finally  into  the  thoroughly  waking  state,  and  the  outer  world  of 
sense,  f 

Ecstasy  is  the  term  used  by  Plotinus ;  it  is  entirely  identical  with 
the  term  turiya  of  Hindu  psychology. 

Under  ordinary  conditions  the  consciousness  is  surrounded  by 
what  constitutes  its  sense-organs  and  receptive  apparatus  in  the 
phenomenal  world;  it  differentiates  the  "subjective"  from  the 
"objective;"  divides  the  world  into  I  and  Not-I,  and  discerns  its 
forms  of  perception  from  "reality."  It  recognizes  the  phenom- 
enal objective  world  as  reality,  and  dreams  as  unreality,  and  in- 
cludes along  with  it,  as  being  unreal,  the  entire  subjective  world. 
Its  vague  sensation  of  real  things,  lying  beyond  that  which  is  ap- 
prehended by  the  organs  of  sense,  i.  е.,  sensations  of  noumena, 
consciousness  identifies  as  it  were  with  dreams — with  the  unreal, 

*  According  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Southern  Hindu  School  of  occultism,  the  four  states  of 
consciousness  are  understood  in  somewhat  diffeient  order.  The  most  remoie  from  the  True,  the  most 
illusory,  is  the  waking  state;  the  second — sleep — is  already  nearer  to  the  True;  the  third — -deep  sle'p 
without  dreams — contact  with  the  True;  and  the  fourth,  skm&dhi,  or  ecstasy — union  with  the  True. 

t  Ibid,  p.  xxvii. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  247 

imaginary,  abstract,  subjective — and  regards  phenomena  as  the 
only  reality. 

Gradually  convinced  by  reason  of  the  unreality  of  phenomena, 
or  inwardly  sensing  this  unreality  and  the  reality  which  lies  be- 
hind, consciousness  frees  itself  from  the  mirage  of  phenomena,  sees 
that  all  the  phenomenal  world  is  in  substance  subjective  also,  that 
the  great  realities  lie  deeper  down.  Then  a  complete  change  takes 
place  in  consciousness  in  all  its  concepts  about  reality.  That  which 
before  was  regarded  as  real  becomes  unreal,  and  that  which  was 
regarded  as  unreal  becomes  real.  And  the  consciousness  tran- 
scends, i.  е.,  returns  to  that  state  of  absolute  consciousness  out  of 
which  it  came. 

This  transition  into  the  absolute  state  of  consciousness  is 
"union  with  Divinity,"  "vision  of  God,"  experiencing  the 
"Kingdom  of  Heaven,"  "entering  Nirvana."  All  these  ex- 
pressions of  mystical  religions  represent  the  psychological  fact  of 
the  expansion  of  consciousness,  such  an  expansion  that  the  con- 
sciousness absorbs  itself  in  the  all. 

C.  W.  Leadbeater,  in  an  essay,  "Some  Notes  on  the  Higher 
Planes.    Nirvana"  {The  Theosophist.    July,  1910.)  writes: 

Sir  Edwin  Arnold  wrote  of  that  beatific  condition,  that  "  the  dewdrop 
slips  into  the  shining  sea." 

Those  who  have  passed  through  that  most  marvelous  of  experiences 
know  that,  paradoxical  as  it  may  seem,  the  sensation  is  exactly  the  re- 
verse, and  that  a  far  closer  description  would  be  that  the  ocean  had 

SOMEHOW  BEEN  POURED  INTO  THE  DROP! 

That  consciousness,  wide  as  the  sea,  with  "its  center  everywhere  and 
its  circumference  nowhere"  is  a  great  and  glorious  fact;  but  when  a  man 
attains  it,  it  seems  to  him  that  his  consciousness  has  widened  to  take  in 
all  that,  not  that  he  is  merged  into  something  else. 

This  pouring  of  the  ocean  into  the  drop  occurs  because  the  con- 
sciousness never  loses  itself,  i.  е.,  does  not  disappear,  does  not  ex- 
tinguish itself.  When  it  seems  to  us  that  consciousness  is  ex- 
tinguished, in  reality  it  is  only  changing  its  form,  it  ceases  to  be 
analogical  to  ours,  and  we  lose  the  means  of  convincing  ourselves 
of  its  existence. 

We  have  no  definite  data  at  all  to  think  that  it  is  dissipated.  In 
order  to  escape  from  the  field  possible  to  our  observation,  it  is 
sufficient  for  consciousness  то  change  only  a  little. 


248  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

In  the  objective  world  indeed,  this  "slipping  of  the  dewdrop 
into  the  sea"  leads  to  the  annihilation  of  the  drop,  to  the  absorp- 
tion of  it  by  the  sea.  We  have  never  observed  another  order  of 
things  in  the  objective  world  and  therefore  cannot  imagine  it. 
But  in  the  real,  i.  е.,  the  subjective  world,  of  course  another  order 
must  exist  and  operate.  The  drop  of  consciousness  merging 
with  the  sea  of  consciousness  knows  it,  but  does  not  itself  cease  to 
exist  because  of  that.  Therefore  undoubtedly,  the  sea  is  absorbed 
by  the  drop. 

In  the  "Letters  to  Flaccus"  of  Plotinus,  we  find  a  wonderful 
description  of  a  psychology  and  theory  of  knowledge  founded 
exactly  upon  the  idea  of  the  expansion  of  the  I. 

External  objects  present  us  only  with  appearances.  Concerning 
them,  therefore,  we  may  be  said  to  possess  opinion  rather  than  knowl- 
edge. The  distinctions  in  the  actual  world  of  appearance  are  of  import 
only  to  ordinary  and  practical  men.  Our  question  lies  with  the  ideal 
reality  that  exists  behind  appearacnce.  How  does  the  mind  perceive 
these  ideas?  Are  they  without  us,  and  is  the  reason,  like  sensation,  occu- 
pied with  objects  external  to  itself?  What  certainty  would  we  then 
have — what  assurance  that  our  perception  was  infallible?  The  object 
perceived  would  be  a  something  different  from  the  mind  perceiving  it. 
We  should  have  then  an  image  instead  of  reality.  It  would  be  mon- 
strous to  believe  for  a  moment  that  the  mind  was  unable  to  perceive 
ideal  truth  exactly  as  it  is,  and  that  we  had  not  certainty  and  real  knowl- 
edge concerning  the  world  of  intelligence.  It  follows,  therefore,  that 
this  region  of  truth  is  not  to  be  investigated  as  a  thing  external  to  us, 
and  so  only  imperfectly  known.  It  is  within  us.  Here  the  objects  we 
contemplate  and  that  which  contemplates  are  identical — both  are 
thought.  The  subject  cannot  surely  know  an  object  different  from  itself. 
The  world  of  ideas  lies  within  our  intelligence.  Truth,  therefore,  is  not 
the  agreement  of  our  apprehension  of  an  external  object  with  the  object 
itself.  It  is  the  agreement  of  the  mind  with  itself.  Consciousness, 
therefore,  is  the  sole  basis  of  certainty.  The  mind  is  its  own  witness. 
Reason  sees  in  itself  that  which  is  above  itself  and  its  source;  and  again, 
that  which  is  below  itself  as  still  itself  once  more. 

Knowledge  has  three  degrees — opinion,  science,  illumination.  The 
means  or  instrument  of  the  first  is  sense;  of  the  second  dialectic;  of  the 
third  intuition.  To  the  last  I  subordinate  reason.  It  is  absolute  knowl- 
edge founded  on  the  identity  of  the  mind  knowing  with  the  object  known. 

There  is  a  raying  out  of  all  orders  of  existence,  an  external  emanation 
from  the  ineffable  One.  There  is  again  a  returning  impulse,  drawing 
all  upwards  and  inwards  toward  the  center  from  whence  all  came. 
The  wise  man  recognizes  the  idea  of  the  good  within  him.  This  he 
develops  by  withdrawal  into  the  holy  place  of  his  own  soul.  He  who 
does  not  understand  how  the  soul  contains  the  beautiful  within  itself, 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  249 

seeks  to  realize  beauty  without  by  laborious  production.  His  aim  should 
rather  be  to  concentrate  and  simplify,  and  so  to  expand  his  being;  instead 
of  going  out  into  the  manifold,  to  forsake  it  for  the  One,  and  to  float  up- 
wards towards  the  divine  fount  of  being  whose  stream  flows  within  him. 

You  ask,  how  can  we  know  the  Infinite?  I  answer,  not  by  reason.  It 
is  the  office  of  reason  to  distinguish  and  define.  The  infinite,  therefore, 
cannot  be  ranked  among  its  objects.  You  can  only  apprehend  the 
infinite  by  a  faculty  superior  to  reason,  by  entering  into  a  state  in  which 
you  are  your  finite  self  no  longer — in  which  the  divine  essence  is  com- 
municated to  you.  This  is  ecstacy.  It  is  the  liberation  of  your  mind 
from  its  finite  consciousness.  Like  can  only  apprehend  like;  when  you 
thus  cease  to  be  finite,  you  become  one  with  the  infinite.  In  the  reduc- 
tion of  your  soul  to  its  simplest  self,  its  divine  essence,  you  realize  this 
union — this  identity. 

But  this  sublime  condition  is  not  of  permanent  duration.  It  is  only 
now  and  then  that  we  can  enjoy  this  elevation  above  the  limits  of  the 
body  and  the  world.  I  myself  have  realized  it  but  three  times  as  yet, 
and  Porphyry  hitherto  not  once. 

All  that  tends  to  purify  and  elevate  the  mind  will  assist  you  in  this  at- 
tainment, and  facilitate  the  approach  and  the  recurrence  of  these  happy 
intervals.  There  are,  then,  different  roads  by  which  this  end  may  be 
reached.  The  love  of  beauty  which  exalts  the  poet;  that  devotion  to 
the  One  and  that  ascent  of  science  which  makes  the  ambition  of  the 
philosopher,  and  that  love  and  those  prayers  by  which  some  devout  and 
ardent  soul  tends  in  its  moral  purity  towards  perfection — these  are  the 
great  highways  conducting  to  that  height  above  the  actual  and  the  par- 
ticular, where  we  stand  in  the  immediate  presence  of  the  Infinite,  who 
shines  out  as  from  the  depths  of  the  soul. 

In  another  place  in  his  works,  Plotinus  defines  the  ecstatic 
knowledge  more  exactly,  presenting  such  properties  of  it  as  to 
reveal  to  us  quite  clearly  that  the  infinite  expansion  of  subjective 
knowledge  is  there  meant. 

When  we  see  God,  says  Plotinus,  we  see  him  not  by  reason,  but  by 
something  that  is  higher  than  reason.  It  is  impossible  however  to  say 
about  him  who  sees  that  he  sees,  because  he  does  not  behold  and  discern 
two  different  things  (the  seer  and  the  thing  seen).  He  changes  com- 
pletely, ceases  to  be  himself,  preserves  nothing  of  his  I.  Immersed  in 
God,  he  constitutes  one  whole  with  Him;  like  the  center  of  a  circle, 
which  coincides  with  the  center  of  another  circle. 


CHAPTER  XX 

The  sense  of  infinity.  The  neophyte's  first  ordeal.  An  intolerable  sad- 
ness. The  loss  of  everything  real.  What  would  an  animal  feel  on 
becoming  a  man?  The  transition  to  the  new  logic.  Our  logic  as 
founded  on  the  observation  of  the  laws  of  the  phenomenal  world. 
Its  invalidity  for  the  study  of  the  world  of  noumena.  The  necessity 
for  another  logic.  Analogy  between  the  axioms  of  logic  and  of 
mathematics.  Two  mathematics.  The  mathematics  of  real  mag- 
nitudes (infinite  and  variable);  and  the  mathematics  of  unreal,  imag- 
inary magnitudes  (finite  and  constant).  Transfinite  numbers- 
numbers  lying  beyond  infinity.  The  possibility  of  different  infini- 
ties. 

N  the  book,  "A  New  Era  of  Thought"— concerning  which 
I  have  had  already  much  to  say— in  the  interesting  chapter, 
"Space  the  Scientific  Basis  of  Altruism  and  Religion,'* 
Hinton  says: 

When  we  come  upon  infinity  in  any  mode  of  our  thought,  it 
is  a  sign  that  that  mode  of  thought  is  dealing  with  a  higher  reality  than 
it  is  adapted  for,  and  in  struggling  to  represent  it,  can  only  do  so  by  an 
infinite  number  of  terms  (of  realities  of  a  higher  order). 

Truly  what  is  infinity,  as  the  ordinary  mind  represents  it  to 

itself? 

This  is  the  abyss,  the  bottomless  pit  into  which  the  mind  falls, 
after  having  risen  to  heights  to  which  it  is  not  native. 

Let  us  imagine  for  a  moment  that  a  man  begins  to  feel  infinity 
in  everything:  every  thought,  every  idea  leads  him  to  the  realiza- 
tion of  infinity. 

This  will  inevitably  happen  to  a  man  approaching  an  under- 
standing of  a  higher  order  of  reality. 

But  what  will  he  feel  under  such  circumstances? 

He  will  feel  a  precipice,  an  abyss  everywhere,  no  matter  where 
he  looks;  and  experience  indeed  an  incredible  horror,  fear  and 
sadness. 

" .  .  .  An  intolerable  sadness  is  the  very  first  experience 
of  the  Neophyte  in  occultism.  .  .  "  says  the  author  of 
"Light  on  the  Path." 

251 


252  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

We  have  already  examined  into  the  manner  in  which  a  two- 
dimensional  being  might  approach  to  a  comprehension  of  the  third 
dimension.  But  we  have  never  asked  ourselves  the  question: 
what  would  it  feel,  beginning  to  sense  the  third  dimension,  begin- 
ning to  be  conscious  of  "a  new  world"  environing  it? 

First  of  all,  it  would  feel  astonishment  and  fright — fright  ap- 
proaching horror;  because  in  order  to  find  the  new  world  it  must 
lose  the  old  one. 

Let  us  imagine  the  predicament  of  an  animal  in  which  flashes 
of  human  consciousness  have  begun  to  appear. 

What  will  it  be  conscious  of  first  of  all?  First  of  all,  that  its  old 
world,  the  world  of  the  animal,  its  comfortable,  habitual  world,  the 
one  in  which  it  was  born,  to  which  it  has  become  accustomed,  and 
which  it  imagines  to  be  the  only  real  one,  is  crumbling  away  and 
falling  all  around  it.  Everything  that  before  seemed  real,  becomes 
false,  delusive,  fantastic,  unreal.  The  impression  of  the  unreality 
of  all  its  environment  will  be  very  strong. 

Until  such  a  being  shall  learn  to  comprehend  the  reality  of 
another,  higher  order,  until  it  shall  understand  that  behind  the 
crumbling  old  world  one  infinitely  more  beautiful  and  new  is 
opening  up,  considerable  time  will  necessarily  pass.  And  during 
all  this  time,  a  being  in  whom  this  new  consciousness  is  in  process 
of  being  born,  must  pass  from  one  abyss  of  despair  to  another, 
from  one  negation  to  another.  It  must  repudiate  everything 
around  itself.  Only  by  the  repudiation  of  everything  will  the 
possibility  of  entering  into  a  new  life  be  realized. 

With  the  beginning  of  the  gradual  loss  of  the  old  world,  the 
logic  of  the  two-dimensional  being — or  that  which  stood  for  it  for 
logic — will  suffer  continual  violation,  and  its  strongest  impression 
will  be  that  there  is  no  logic  at  all,  that  no  laws  of  any  sort  even  exist. 

Formerly,  when  it  was  an  animal,  it  reasoned: 

This  is  this.  This  house  is  my  own. 

That  is  that.  That  house  is  strange. 

This  is  not  that.  The  strange  house  is  not  my  own. 

The  strange  house  and  its  own  house  the  animal  regards  as 
different  objects,  having  nothing  in  common,  as  a  house  and  a  tree. 
But  now  it  will  surprisedly  understand  that  the  strange  house  and 
its  own  house  are  equally  houses. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  253 

How  will  it  express  this  in  its  language  of  perceptions?  Strictly 
speaking,  it  will  not  be  able  to  express  this  at  all,  because  it  is  im- 
possible to  express  concepts  in  the  language  of  an  animal.  The 
animal  will  simply  mix  up  the  sensations  of  the  strange  house  and 
its  own  house.  Confusedly,  it  will  begin  to  feel  some  new  proper- 
ties in  houses,  and  along  with  this  it  will  feel  less  clearly  those 
properties  which  made  the  strange  house  strange.  Simultane- 
ously with  this,  the  animal  will  begin  to  sense  new  properties  which 
it  did  not  know  before.  As  a  result  it  will  undoubtedly  experience 
the  necessity  for  a  system  of  generalization  of  these  new  proper- 
ties— the  necessity  for  a  new  logic  expressing  the  relations  of  the 
new  order  of  things.  But  having  no  concepts  it  will  not  be  in  a 
position  to  construe  the  axioms  of  Aristototelian  logic,  and  will 
express  its  impression  of  the  new  order  in  the  form  of  the  entirely 
absurd  proposition: 

This  is  that. 

Further,  let  us  imagine  that  to  the  animal  with  the  rudimentary 
logic  expressing  its  sensations, 

This  is  this. 
That  is  that. 
This  is  not  that. 

somebody  tries  to  prove  that  two  different  objects,  two  houses — 
its  own  and  a  strange  one — are  similar,  that  they  represent  one  and 
the  same  thing,  that  they  are  both  houses.  The  animal  will  never 
credit  this  similarity.  For  it  the  two  houses,  its  own,  where  it  is  fed, 
and  the  strange  one,  where  it  is  beaten  if  it  enters,  will  remain 
entirely  different.  There  will  be  nothing  in  common  in  them  for  it, 
and  the  effort  to  prove  to  it  the  similarity  of  these  two  houses  will 
lead  to  nothing  until  it  senses  this  itself.  Then,  sensing  confusedly 
the  idea  of  the  likeness  of  two  different  objects,  and  being  without 
concepts,  the  animal  will  express  this  as  something  illogical  from 
its  own  point  of  view.  The  idea,  this  and  that  are  similar  objects, 
the  articulate  two-dimensional  being  will  translate  into  the  lan- 
guage of  its  logic,  in  the  shape  of  the  formula :  This  is  that;  and  of 
course  will  pronounce  it  an  absurdity,  and  that  the  sensation  of 
the  new  order  of  things  leads  to  logical  absurdities.  But  it  will  be 
unable  to  express  that  which  it  senses  in  any  other  way. 


254  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

We  are  in  exactly  the  same  position — when  we  dead  awaken — 
i.  е.,  when  we,  men,  come  to  the  realization  of  that  other  life,  to 
the  comprehension  of  higher  things. 

The  same  fright,  the  same  loss  of  the  real,  the  same  impression 
of  utter  and  never-ending  illogicality  will  afflict  us. 

In  order  to  realize  the  new  world,  we  must  understand  the  new 
logical  order  of  things. 

Our  usual  logic  assists  us  in  the  investigation  of  the  relations  of 
the  phenomenal  world  only.  Many  attempts  have  been  made  to 
define  what  logic  is.  But  logic  is  just  as  essentially  undefinable 
as  is  mathematics. 

What  is  mathematics?    The  science  of  magnitudes. 

What  is  logic?    The  science  of  concepts. 

But  these  are  not  definitions,  they  are  only  the  translation  of 
the  name.  Mathematics,  or  the  science  of  magnitudes,  is  that 
system  which  studies  the  quantitive  relations  between  things ;  logic, 
or  the  science  of  concepts,  is  that  system  which  studies  the 
qualititive  (categorical)  relations  between  things. 

Logic  has  been  built  up  quite  in  the  same  way  as  mathematics. 
As  with  logic,  so  also  with  mathematics  (at  least  the  generally 
known  mathematics  of  "finite"  and  "constant"  numbers),  both 
were  deduced  by  us  from  the  observation  of  the  phemomena  of 
our  world.  Generalizing  our  observations,  we  gradually  discover- 
ed those  relations  which  we  called  the  fundamental  laws  of  the 
world. 

In  logic,  these  fundamental  laws  are  included  in  the  axioms  of 
Aristotle  and  of  Bacon. 

A  is  A. 

{That  which  was  A,  will  be  A.) 

A  is  not  A. 

{That  which  was  not  A,  will  not  be  A.) 

{Everything  is  either  A  or  not  A.) 
{Everything  will  be  either  A  or  not  A). 

The  logic  of  Aristotle  and  Bacon,  developed  and  supplemented 
by  their  many  followers,  deals  with  concepts  only. 

The  word,  logos — this  is  the  object  of  logic.  An  idea,  in  order 
to  become  the  object  of  logical  reasoning,  in  order  to  be  subjected 


TERTIUM  ORGANTJM  255 

to  the  laws  of  logic,  must  be  expressed  in  a  word.  That  which 
cannot  be  expressed  in  a  word  cannot  enter  into  a  logical  system. 
Moreover  a  word  can  enter  into  a  logical  system,  can  be  subjected 
to  logical  laws,  only  as  a  concept. 

A  word  as  such  may  have  also  another  meaning  in  addition  to 
the  concept  with  which  it  is  usually  associated:  a  word  may  have 
a  symbolical  or  allegorical  meaning,  may  contain  within  itself  a 
certain  music,  or  a  definite  emotional  tone.  But  all  this  cannot 
enter  into  a  logical  system.  No  matter  what  symbolical,  alle- 
gorical, musical  or  emotional  meaning  a  word  may  have,  in  a 
logical  construction  it  will  enter  in  its  exact  logical  meaning,  i.  е., 
as  a  concept. 

At  the  same  time  we  know  very  well  that  not  everything  can  be 
expressed  in  words.  In  our  life  and  in  our  feelings  there  is  much 
that  cannot  be  expressed  in  concepts.  Thus  it  is  clear  that  even  at 
the  present  moment,  at  the  present  stage  of  our  development,  not 
everything  can  be  entirely  logical  for  us.  There  are  many  things 
which  in  their  substance  are  outside  of  logic  altogether.  This  in- 
cludes the  entire  region  of  feelings,  emotions,  religion.  All  art  is 
just  one  entire  illogicality;  and  as  we  shall  presently  see,  mathe- 
matics, the  most  exact  of  sciences,  is  entirely  illogical. 

If  we  compare  the  axioms  of  the  logic  of  Aristotle  and  of  Bacon 
with  the  axioms  of  mathematics  as  it  is  commonly  known,  we 
find  between  them  complete  similarity. 

The  axioms  of  logic, 

A  is  A.  Vov- 

A  is  not, A. 

Everything  is  either  A  or  not  A. 

fully  correspond  to  the  fundamental  axioms  of  mathematics,  to  the 
axioms  of  identity  and  difference. 

Every  magnitude  is  equal  to  itself. 
The  part  is  less  than  the  whole. 

Two  magnitudes,  equal  separately  to  a  third,  are  equal  to  each 
other,  etc. 

The  similarity  between  the  axioms  of  mathematics  and  those 
of  logic  extends  very  far,  and  this  permits  us  to  draw  a  conclusion 
about  their  similar  origin. 


256  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

The  laws  of  mathematics  and  the  laws  of  logic — these  are  the 
laws  of  the  reflection  of  the  phenomenal  world  in  our  conscious- 
ness. 

Just  as  the  axioms  of  logic  can  deal  with  concepts  only,  and  are 
related  solely  to  them,  so  the  axioms  of  mathematics  apply  to 
finite  and  constant  magnitudes  only,  and  are  related  solely  to 

them. 

These  axioms  are  untrue  in  relation  to  infinite  and 
variable  magnitudes,  just  as  the  axioms  of  logic  are  untrue  in 
relation  to  emotions,  to  symbols,  to  the  musicality  and  the  hidden 
meaning  of  words. 

What  does  this  mean? 

It  means  that  the  axioms  of  logic  and  of  mathematics  are  de- 
duced by  us  from  the  observation  of  phenomena,  i.  е.,  of  the  phe- 
nomenal world,  and  represent  in  themselves  a  certain  conditional 
incorrectness,  which  is  necessary  for  the  knowledge  of  the  unreal 
world. 


As  has  been  said  before,  we  have  in  reality  two  mathematics. 
One,  the  mathematics  of  Unite  and  constant  numbers,  represents  a 
quite  artificial  construction  for  the  solution  of  problems  based  on 
conditional  data.  The  chief  of  these  conditional  data  consists  in 
the  fact  that  in  problems  of  this  mathematics  there  is  always  taken 
the  t  of  the  universe  only,  i.  е.,  one  section  only  of  the  universe  is 
taken,  which  section  is  never  taken  in  conjunction  with  another 
one.  This  mathematics  of  finite  and  constant  magnitudes  studies 
an  artificial  universe,  and  is  in  itself  something  especially  created 
on  the  basis  of  our  observation  of  phenomena,  and  serves  for  the 
simplification  of  these  observations.  Beyond  phenomena  the 
mathematics  of  finite  and  constant  numbers  cannot  go.  It  is 
dealing  with  an  imaginary  world,  with  imaginary  magnitudes. 
The  other,  the  mathematics  of  infinite  and  variable  magnitudes, 
represents  something  entirely  real,  built  upon  the  reasonings  in 
regard  to  a  real  world. 

The  first  is  related  to  the  world  of  phenomena,  which  repre- 
sents in  itself  nothing  other  than  our  incorrect  apprehension  and 
perception  of  the  world. 

The  second  is  related  to  the  world  of  noumena,  which  repre- 
sents in  itself  the  world  as  it  is. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  257 

The  first  is  unreal,  it  exists  in  our  consciousness,  in  our  imagina- 
tion. 

The  second  is  real,  it  expresses  the  relations  of  a  real  world. 


Transfinite  numbers,  so  called,  may  serve  as  an  example  of 
"real  mathematics,"  violating  the  fundamental  axioms  of  our 
mathematics  (and  logic). 

By  transfinite  numbers,  as  their  name  implies,  is  meant  numbers 
beyond  infinity. 

Infinity,  as  represented  by  the  sign  GO  is  the  mathematical 
expression  with  which,  as  such,  it  is  possible  to  perform  all  oper- 
ations:  divide,  multiply,  raise  to  powers.  It  is  possible  to  raise 
infinity  to  the  power  of  infinity — it  will  be  00  °°  .  This  magnitude  is 
an  infinite  number  of  times  greater  than  simple  infinity.  And  at 
the  same  time  they  are  both  equal:  GO  =  00  °°.  And  this  is 
the  most  remarkable  property  of  transfinite  numbers.  You  may 
perform  with  them  any  operations  whatsoever,  they  will  change 
in  a  corresponding  manner,  remaining  at  the  same  time  equal. 
This  violates  the  fundamental  laws  of  mathematics  accepted  for 
finite  numbers.  After  a  change,  the  finite  number  cannot  be  equal 
to  itself.  But  here  we  see  how,  changing,  the  transfinite  number 
remains  equal  to  itself. 

After  all,  transfinite  numbers  are  entirely  real.     We  can  find 
examples  corresponding  to  the  expression   GO   and  even   GO 
and   00  °°  °°  in  our  world. 

Let  us  take  a  line — any  segment  of  a  line.  We  know  that  the 
number  of  points  on  this  line  is  equal  to  infinity,  for  a  point  has 
no  dimension.  If  our  segment  is  equal  to  one  inch,  and  beside  it 
we  shall  imagine  a  segment  a  mile  long,  then  in  the  little  segment 
each  point  will  correspond  to  a  point  in  the  large  one.  The  num- 
ber of  points  in  a  segment  one  inch  long  is  infinite.  The  number 
of  points  in  a  segment  one  mile  long  is  also  infinite.  We  get 
00  =  GO. 

Let  us  now  imagine  a  square,  one  side  of  which  is  a  given  seg- 
ment, a.  The  number  of  lines  in  a  square  is  infinite.  The  number 
of  points  in  each  line  is  infinite.  Consequently,  the  number  of 
points  in  a  square  is  equal  to  infinity  multiplied  by  itself  an  infinite 
number  of  times  00  °°.  This  magnitude  is  undoubtedly  in- 
finitely greater  than  the  first  one:   GO,  and  at  the  same  time 


258  TERTIUM  ORGAN  UM 

they  are  equal,  as  all  infinite  magnitudes  are  equal,  because,  if 
there  be  an  infinity,  then  it  is  one,  and  cannot  change. 

Upon  the  square  a2,  let  us  construct  a  cube.  This  cube  consists 
of  an  infinite  number  of  squares,  just  as  a  square  consists  of  an 
infinite  number  of  lines,  and  a  line  of  an  infinite  number  of  points. 
Consequently,  the  number  of  points  in  the  cube,  a3  is  equal  to 
00  °°  °° ,  this  expression  is  equal  to  the  expression  00  °° 
and  QC  ,  i.  е.,  this  means  that  an  infinity  continues  to  grow,  re- 
maining at  the  same  time  unchanged* 

Thus  in  transfinite  numbers,  we  see  that  two  magnitudes  equal 
separately  to  the  third,  can  be  not  equal  to  each  other.  Generally 
speaking,  we  see  that  the  fundamental  axioms  of  our  mathematics 
do  not  work  there,  are  not  there  valid.  We  have  therefore  a  full 
right  to  establish  the  law,  that  the  fundamental  axioms  of  mathe- 
matics enumerated  above  are  not  applicable  to  transfinite  num- 
bers, but  are  applicable  and  valid  only  ior  finite  numbers. 

"We  may  also  say  that  the  fundamental  axioms  of  our  mathe- 
matics are  valid  for  constant  magnitudes  only  Or  in  other 
words,  they  demand  unity  of  time  and  unity  of  acting  agents.  That 
is,  each  magnitude  is  equal  to  itself  at  a  given  moment.  But  if  we 
take  a  magnitude  which  varies,  and  take  it  in  different  moments, 
then  it  will  not  be  equal  to  itself.  Of  course,  we  may  say  that 
changing,  it  becomes  another  magnitude,  that  it  is  a  given  magni- 
tude only  so  long  as  it  does  not  change.  But  this  is  precisely  the 
thing  that  I  am  talking  about. 

The  axioms  of  our  usual  mathematics  are  applicable  to  finite 
and  constant  magnitudes  only. 

Thus  quite  in  opposition  to  the  usual  view,  we  must  admit  that 
the  mathematics  of  finite  and  constant  magnitudes  is  unreal,  i.  е., 
that  it  deals  with  the  unreal  relations  of  unreal  magnitudes;  while 
the  mathematics  of  infinite  and  fluent  magnitudes  is  real,  i.  е., 
that  it  deals  with  the  real  relations  of  real  magnitudes. 

Truly  the  greatest  magnitude  of  the  first  mathematics  has  no 
dimension  whatever,  it  is  equal  to  zero  or  a  point,  in  comparison 
with  any  magnitude  of  the  second  mathematics,  all  magnitudes 

OF  WHICH,  DESPITE    THEIR    DIVERSITY,    ARE  EQUAL  AMONG  THEM- 
SELVES. 

*  This  paragraph  and  the  preceding  are  open  to  criticism  from  the  technical  standpoint.  It  is  probable 
that  the  author  sacrificed  technical  exactness  in  his  desire  to  give  those  who  are  not  initiated  into  the 
mysteries  of  mathematics  a  clear,  and  as  it  were  tangible  illustration  of  transfinite  numbers. 

Those  readers  who  are  not  professional  mathematicians,  and  desire  to  know  more  about  this  sub- 
ject, may  find  a  clear  and  simple  exposition  of  the  properties  of  transfinite  numbers  in  Introduction 
to  Mathematical  Philosophy"  by  Bertrand  Russell  (Macmillan).     Transl. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  259 

Thus  both  here,  as  in  logic,  the  axioms  of  a  new  mathematics  ap- 
pear as  absurdities. 

A  magnitude  can  be  not  equal  to  itself. 

A  part  can  be  equal  to  the  whole,  or  it  can  be  greater  than  the 
whole. 

One  of  two  equal  magnitudes  can  be  infinitely  greater  than  another. 
All  different  magnitudes  are  equal  among  themselves. 

A  complete  analogy  is  observed  between  the  axioms  of  mathe- 
matics and  those  of  logic.  The  logical  unit — a  concept — possesses 
all  the  properties  of  a  finite  and  constant  magnitude.  The  funda- 
mental axioms  of  mathematics  and  logic  are  essentially  one  and 
the  same.  They  are  correct  under  the  same  conditions,  and  under 
the  same  conditions  they  cease  to  be  correct. 

Without  any  exaggeration  we  may  say  that  the  fundamental 
axioms  of  mathematics  and  of  logic  are  correct  only  just  so  long  as 
mathematics  and  logic  deal  with  magnitudes  which  are  artificial, 
conditional,  and  which  do  not  exist  in  nature. 

The  truth  is  that  in  nature  there  are  no  finite,  constant  magni- 
tudes, just  as  also  there  are  no  concepts.  The  finite,  constant  mag- 
nitude and  the  concept — these  are  conditional  abstractions,  not 
reality,  but  merely  the  sections  of  reality,  so  to  speak. 

How  shall  we  reconcile  the  idea  of  the  absence  of  constant  mag- 
nitudes with  the  idea  of  an  immobile  universe?  At  first  sight  one 
appears  to  contradict  the  other.  But  in  reality  this  contradiction 
does  not  exist.  Not  this  universe  is  immobile,  but  the  greater  uni- 
verse, the  world  of  four  dimensions,  of  which  we  know  that  per- 
petually moving  section,  called  the  three-dimensional  infinite 
sphere. 

Already  we  have  analyzed  in  detail  how  the  idea  of  motion  fol- 
lows from  our  time  sense,  i.e.,  from  the  imperefction  of  our  space- 
sense. 

Were  our  space  sense  more  perfect  in  relation  to  any  given  ob- 
ject, say  to  the  body  of  a  given  man,  we  could  embrace  all  his  life 
in  time,  from  birth  to  death.  Then  within  the  limits  of  this  em- 
brace that  life  would  be  for  us  a  constant  magnitude.  But  now,  at 
every  given  moment  of  it,  it  is  for  us  not  a  constant,  but  a  variable 
magnitude.  That  which  we  call  a  body  does  not  exist  in  reality.  It 
is  only  the  section  of  that  four-dimensional  body  that  we  never 
see.    We  ought  always  to  remember  that  our  entire  three-dimen- 


260  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

sional  world  does  not  exist  in  reality.  It  is  a  creation  of  our  im- 
perfect senses,  the  result  of  their  imperfection.  This  is  not  the 
world  but  merely  that  which  we  see  of  the  world.  The  three- 
dimensional  world — this  is  the  four-dimensional  world  observed 
through  the  narrow  slit  of  our  senses.  Therefore  all  magnitudes 
which  we  regard  as  such  in  the  three-dimensional  world  are  not 
real  magnitudes,  but  merely  artificially  assumed. 

They  do  not  exist  really,  in  the  same  way  that  the  present  does 
not  exist  really.  This  has  been  dwelt  upon  before.  By  the  present 
we  designate  the  transition  from  the  future  into  the  past.  But  this 
transition  has  no  extension.  Therefore  the  present  does  not  exist. 
Only  the  future  and  the  past  exist. 

Thus  constant  magnitudes  in  the  three-dimensional  world  are 
only  abstractions,  just  as  motion  in  the  three-dimensional  world 
is,  in  substance,  an  abstraction.  In  the  three-dimensional  world 
there  is  no  change,  no  motion.  In  order  to  think  motion,  we  al- 
ready need  the  four-dimensional  world.  The  three-dimensional 
world  does  not  exist  in  reality,  or  it  exists  only  during  one  ideal 
moment.  In  the  next  ideal  moment  there  already  exists  another 
three-dimensional  world.  Therefore  the  magnitude  A  in  the  fol- 
lowing moment  is  already  not  A,  but  B,  in  the  next  C,  and  so 
forth  to  infinity.  It  is  equal  to  itself  in  one  ideal  moment  only. 
In  other  words,  within  the  limits  of  each  ideal  moment  the  axioms 
of  mathematics  are  true;  for  the  comparison  of  two  ideal  moments 
they  are  merely  conditional  as  the  logic  of  Bacon  is  conditional  in 
comparison  with  the  logic  of  Aristotle.  In  time,  i.  е.,  in  relation  to 
variable  magnitudes,  from  the  standpoint  of  the  ideal  moment, 
they  are  untrue. 

The  idea  of  constancy  or  variability  emanates  from  the  im- 
potence of  our  limited  reason  to  comprehend  a  thing  otherwise 
than  by  a  section.  If  we  would  comprehend  a  thing  in  four 
dimensions,  let  us  say  a  human  body  from  birth  to  death,  then  it 
will  be  the  whole  and  constant,  the  section  of  which  we  call 
a-changing -in-time  human  body.  A  moment  of  life,  i.  е.,  a  body  as 
we  know  it  in  the  three-dimensional  world,  is  a  point  on  an  infinite 
line.  Could  we  comprehend  this  body  as  a  whole,  then  we  would 
know  it  as  an  absolutely  constant  magnitude,  with  all  its  multifari- 
ousness of  forms,  states  and  positions;  but  then  to  this  constant 
magnitude  the  axioms  of  our  mathematics  and  logic  would  be  in- 
applicable, because  it  would  be  an  infinite  magnitude. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  261 

We  cannot  comprehend  this  infinite  magnitude.  We  compre- 
hend always  its  sections  only.  And  our  mathematics  and  logic  are 
related  to  this  imaginary  section  of  the  universe. 


CHAPTER  XXI 

Man's  transition  to  a  higher  logic.  The  necessity  for  rejecting  every- 
thing "real."  "Poverty  of  the  spirit."  The  recognition  of  the 
infinite  alone  as  real.  Laws  of  the  infinite.  Logic  of  the  finite — 
the  "Organon"  of  Aristotle  and  the  "Novum  Отдалит"  of  Bacon. 
Logic  of  the  infinite — Tertium  Organum.  The  higher  logic  as  an 
instrument  of  thought,  as  a  key  to  the  mysteries  of  nature,  to  the 
hidden  side  of  life,  to  the  world  of  noumena.  A  definition  of  the 
world  of  noumena  on  the  basis  of  all  the  foregoing.  The  impression 
of  the  noumenal  world  on  an  unprepared  consciousness.  "The 
thrice  unknown  darkness  in  the  contemplation  of  which  all  knowl- 
edge is  resolved  into  ignorance." 

VERYTHING  that  has  been  said  about  mathematical 
magnitudes  is  true  also  with  regard  to  logical  concepts. 
Finite  mathematical  magnitudes  and  logical  concepts 
are  subject  to  the  same  laws. 
We  have  now  established  that  the  laws  discovered 
by  us  in  a  space  of  three  dimensions,  and  operating  in  that  space 
are  inapplicable,  incorrect  and  untrue  in  a  space  of  a  greater 
number  of  dimensions. 

And  as  this  is  true  of  mathematics,  so  is  it  true  of  logic. 
As  soon  as  we  begin  to  consider  infinite  and  variable  magnitudes 
instead  of  those  which  are  finite  and  constant,  we  perceive  that 
the  fundamental  axioms  of  our  mathematics  cannot  be  applied 
to  the  former  class. 

And  as  soon  as  we  begin  to  think  in  other  terms  than  those  of 
concepts,  we  must  be  prepared  to  encounter  an  enormous  number 
of  absurdities  from  the  standpoint  of  existing  logic. 

These  absurdities  seem  to  us  such,  because  we  approach  the 
world  of  many  dimensions  with  the  logic  of  the  three-dimensional 
world. 

It  has  been  already  proven  that  to  an  animal,  i.  е.,  to  a  two- 
dimensional  being,  thinking  not  by  concepts,  but  by  perceptions, 
our  logical  ideas  must  seem  absurd. 

The  logical  relations  in  the  world  of  many  dimensions  seem 
equally  absurd  to  us.    We  have  no  reason  whatsoever  to  hope  that 

2GS 


264  TERTIUM   ORGANTJM 

the  relations  of  "the  other  world,"  or  the  world  of  causes  can  be 
logical  from  our  point  of  view.    On  the  contrary,  it  may  be  said 

that    EVERYTHING    LOGICAL    IS    NOT    OF    THE    OTHER    WORLD,    not 

noumenal,  but  phenomenal.  Nothing  can  be  logical,  from  our 
standpoint,  there.  All  that  is  there  must  seem  to  us  a  logical  ab- 
surdity, nonsense.  We  must  remember  that  it  is  impossible  to 
penetrate  there  with  our  logic. 

The  relation  of  the  general  trend  of  the  thought  of  humanity 
toward  the  other  world  has  always  been  highly  incorrect. 

In  "positivism"  men  have  denied  that  other  world  altogether. 
This  was  because,  not  admitting  the  possibility  of  relations  other 
than  those  formulated  by  Aristotle  and  Bacon,  men  denied  the 
very  existence  of  that  which  seemed  absurd  and  impossible  from 
the  standpoint  of  those  formulae.  Also,  in  dualistic  spiritism 
they  attempted  to  construct  the  noumenal  world  on  the  model  of 
the  phenomenal,  that  is,  against  reason,  against  nature,  they 
wanted  at  all  costs  to  prove  that  the  other  world  is  logical  from 
our  standpoint,  that  the  same  laws  of  casuality  operate  just  as  in 
our  world,  and  that  the  other  world  is  nothing  more  than  the 
extension  of  ours. 

Modern  theosophy,  which  began  with  the  denial  of  dualistic 
theses  as  absurd,  came  finally  to  their  affirmation. 

Positive  philosophy  perceived  the  absurdity  of  all  dualistic 
theses,  but  having  no  power  to  expand  the  field  of  its  activity, 
limited  by  "the  infinite  sphere,"  could  think  of  nothing  better 
than  to  DENY. 

Mystical  philosophy  alone  felt  the  possibility  of  relations  other 
than  those  of  the  phenomenal  world,  and  to  this  we  shall  come  at 
the  end  of  all  ends  after  long  wanderings  in  materialistic,  spirit- 
istic, and  neo-theosophic  labyrinths. 

Science  must  come  to  mysticism. 

Science  cannot  deny  the  fact  that  mathematics  grows,  expands, 
and  escapes  from  the  limits  of  the  visible  and  measuable  world. 
Entire  departments  of  mathematics  take  into  consideration  quan- 
titive  relations  which  did  not  exist  in  the  real  world  of  positivism, 
i.  е.,  relations  which  have  no  correspondence  to  any  realities  in  the 
visible,  three-dimensional  world. 

But  there  cannot  be  any  mathematical  relations  to  which  the 
relation  of  some  realities  would  not  correspond.  Therefore  math- 
ematics transcends  the  limits  of  our  world,  and  penetrates  into  a 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  265 

world  unknown.  This  is  the  telescope,  by  the  aid  of  which  we 
begin  to  investigate  the  space  of  many  dimensions  with  its  worlds. 
Mathematics  goes  ahead  of  our  thought,  ahead  of  our  power  of 
imagination  and  perception.  Even  now  it  is  engaged  in  calculating 
relations  which  we  cannot  imagine  at  all. 

It  is  impossible  to  deny  all  this,  even  from  the  strictly  "posi- 
tivistic,"  i.  е.,  positive  standpoint.  Thus  science,  having  admitted 
the  possibility  of  the  expansion  of  mathematics  beyond  the  limits 
of  the  sensuously  perceived  world — that  is,  beyond  the  limits  of  a 
world  accessible  (though  theoretically)  to  the  organs  of  sense  and 
their  mechanical  aids — must  thereby  recognize  the  expansion  of 
the  real  world  far  beyond  the  limits  of  any  "infinite  sphere,"  i.  е., 
must  recognize  the  reality  of  "the  world  of  many  dimensions." 

The  recognition  of  the  reality  of  the  world  of  many  dimensions 
is  the  already  accomplished  transition  to,  and  understanding  of, 
the  world  of  the  wondrous.  And  this  transition  to  the  wondrous 
is  impossible  without  the  recognition  of  the  reality  of  new  logical 
relations  which  are  absurd  from  the  standpoint  of  our  logic. 

What  are  the  laws  of  our  logic? 

They  are  the  laws  of  our  receptivity  of  the  three-dimensional 
world,  or  the  laws  of  our  three-dimensional  receptivity  of  the  world. 

If  we  desire  to  escape  from  the  three-dimensional  world  and  go 
farther,  we  must  first  of  all  work  out  the  fundamental  logical  prin- 
ciples which  would  permit  us  to  observe  the  relations  of  things  in 
a  world  of  many  dimensions — seeing  in  them  a  certain  reasonable- 
ness, and  not  complete  absurdity.  If  we  enter  there  armed  only 
with  the  principles  of  the  logic  of  the  three-dimensional  world, 
these  principles  will  drag  us  back,  will  not  give  us  a  chance  to  rise 
from  the  earth. 

First  of  all  we  must  throw  off  the  chains  of  our  logic.  This  is 
the  first,  the  great,  the  chief  liberation  toward  which  humanity 
must  strive.  Man,  throwing  off  the  chains  of  "  three-dimensional" 
logic,  has  already  penetrated,  in  consciousness,  into  another 
world.  And  not  only  is  this  transition  possible,  but  it  is  accom- 
plished constantly.  Although  unhappily  we  are  not  entirely  con- 
scious of  our  rights  in  "another  world,"  and  often  sacrifice  these 
rights,  regarding  ourselves  as  limited  to  this  earthly  world,  paths 
nevertheless  exist.  Poetry,  mysticism,  the  idealistic  philosophy 
of  all  ages  and  peoples  preserve  the  traces  of  such  transitions. 
Following  these  traces,  we  ourselves  can  find  the  path.    Ancient 


266  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

and  modern  thinkers  have  given  us  many  keys  with  which 
we  may  open  mysterious  doors;  many  magical  formulae,  before 
which  these  doors  open  of  themselves.  But  we  have  not  under- 
stood either  the  purpose  of  these  keys,  nor  the  meaning  of  the 
formulae.  We  have  also  lost  the  understanding  of  magical  cere- 
monies and  rites  of  initiation  into  mysteries  which  had  a  single 
purpose:  to  bring  about  this  transformation  in  the  soul  of  man. 

Therefore  the  doors  remained  closed,  and  we  even  denied  that 
there  was  anything  whatever  behind  them;  or,  suspecting  the  ex- 
istence of  another  world,  we  regarded  it  as  similar  to  ours,  and 
separate  from  ours,  and  tried  to  penetrate  there  unconscious  of 
the  fact  that  the  chief  obstacle  in  our  path  was  our  own  division  of 
the  world  into  this  world  and  that. 

The  world  is  one,  the  ways  of  knowing  it  alone  are  different; 
and  with  imperfect  methods  of  knowledge  it  is  impossible  to  pene- 
trate into  that  which  is  accessible  to  perfect  methods  only. 

All  attempts  to  penetrate  mentally  into  that  higher,  noumenal 
world,  or  world  of  causes  by  means  of  the  logic  of  the  phenomenal 
world  if  they  did  not  fail  altogether,  or  did  not  lead  to  castles  in  the 
air,  gave  only  one  result :  in  becoming  conscious  of  a  new  order  of 
things,  a  man  lost  the  sense  of  the  reality  of  the  old  order.  The 
visible  world  began  to  seem  to  him  fantastic  and  unreal,  every- 
thing all  about  him  was  disappearing,  was  vanishing  like  smoke, 
leaving  a  dreadful  feeling  of  illusion.  In  everything  he  felt  the 
abyss  of  infinity,  and  everything  was  plunging  into  the  abyss. 

This  sense  of  the  infinite  is  the  first  and  most  terrible  trial  before 
initiation.  Nothing  exists !  A  little  miserable  soul  feels  itself  sus- 
pended in  an  infinite  void.  The  mystical  literature  of  all  peoples 
abounds  in  references  to  this  sensation  of  darkness  and  emptiness. 

Such  was  that  mysterious  deity  of  the  ancient  Egyptians,  about 
which  there  exists  a  story  in  the  Orpheus  myth,  in  which  it  is  de- 
scribed as  a  "  Thrice-unknown  darkness  in  contemplation  of  which 
all  knowledge  is  resolved  into  ignorance."* 

This  means  that  man  must  have  felt  horror  transcending  all 
limits  as  he  approached  the  world  of  causes  with  the  knowledge  of 
the  world  of  phenomena  only,  his  instrument  of  logic  having 
proved  useless,  because  all  the  new  eluded  him.  In  the  new  as  yet 
he  sensed  chaos  only,  the  old  had  disappeared,  gone  away  and 
become  unreal.  Horror  and  regret  for  the  loss  of  the  old  mingled 
with  horror  of  the  new — unknown  and  terrible  by  its  infinitude. 

*  "Tbe  Ancient  Wisdom,"  by  Annie  Besant,  Introd.  p.  23,  Theosophical  Publishing  Society,  London. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  267 

At  this  stage  man  must  experience  the  same  thing  that  an  ani- 
mal, becoming  a  man,  would  feel.  Having  looked  into  a  new  world 
for  an  instant,  it  is  attracted  by  the  life  left  behind.  The  world 
which  it  saw  only  for  an  instant  seems  but  a  dream,  a  vision,  the 
creation  of  imagination,  but  the  familiar  old  world,  too,  is  never 
thereafter  the  same,  it  is  too  narrow,  in  it  there  is  not  sufficient 
room.  The  awakening  consciousness  can  no  longer  live  the  free 
life  of  the  beast.  Already  it  knows  something  different,  it  hears 
some  voices,  even  though  the  body  holds  it.  And  the  animal  does 
not  know  where  or  how  it  can  escape  from  the  body  or  from  itself. 

A  man  on  the  threshold  of  a  new  world  experiences  literally  the 
same  thing.  He  has  heard  celestial  harmonies,  and  the  weari- 
some songs  of  earth  touch  him  no  longer,  nor  do  they  move  him — 
or  if  they  touch  and  move  him  it  is  because  they  remind  him  of 
celestial  harmonies,  of  the  inaccessible,  of  the  unknown.  He  has 
experienced  the  sensation  of  an  unusual  expansion  of  conscious- 
ness, when  everything  was  clear  to  him  for  a  moment,  and  he  can- 
not reconcile  himself  to  the  sluggish  earthly  work  of  the  brain. 

These  moments  of  the  "sensation  of  infinity"  are  accompanied 
by  unusual  emotions. 

In  theosophical  literature,  and  in  books  on  occultism,  it  is  often 
asserted  that  on  entering  into  the  "astral"  world,  man  begins  to 
see  new  colors,  colors  which  are  not  in  the  solar  spectrum.  In  this 
symbolism  of  the  new  colors  of  the  "astral  sphere"  is  conveyed  the 
idea  of  those  new  emotions  which  man  begins  to  feel  along  with 
the  sensation  of  the  expansion  of  consciousness — "of  the  sea  pour- 
ing into  the  drop."  This  is  the  "strange  bliss"  of  which  mystics 
speak,  the  "heavenly  light"  which  saints  "see,"  the  "new"  sensa- 
tions experienced  by  poets.  Even  conversational  psychology 
identifies  "ecstasy"  with  entirely  unusual  sensations,  inaccessible 
and  unknown  to  man  in  the  life  of  every  day. 

This  sensation  of  light  and  of  unlimited  joy  is  experienced  at  the 
moment  of  the  expansion  of  consciousness  (the  unfoldment  of  the 
mystical  lotus  of  the  Hindu  yogi),  at  the  moment  of  the  sensation  of 
infinity,  and  it  yields  also  the  sensation  of  darkness  and  of  unlim- 
ited horror. 

What  does  this  mean? 

How  shall  we  reconcile  the  sensation  of  light  with  the  sensation 
of  darkness,  the  sensation  of  joy  with  that  of  horror?  Can  these 
exist  simultaneously?     Does  it  occur  simultaneously? 


268  TERTIUM   ORGANTJM 

It  does  so  occur,  and  must  be  exactly  thus.  Mystical  literature 
gives  us  examples  of  it.  The  simultaneous  sensation  of  light  and 
darkness,  joy  and  horror,  symbolize  as  it  were  the  strange  duality 
and  contradiction  of  human  life.  It  may  happen  to  a  man  of 
dual  nature,  who,  following  one  side  of  his  nature  has  been  led  far 
into  "spirit,"  and  on  the  other  side  is  deeply  immersed  in  "mat- 
ter," i.  е.,  in  illusion,  in  unreality — to  one  who  believes  too  much 
in  the  reality  of  the  unreal. 

Generally  speaking  the  sensation  of  light,  of  life  of  conscious- 
ness penetrating  all,  of  happiness,  gives  a  new  world.  But  the 
same  world  to  the  unprepared  mind  will  give  the  sensation  of 
infinite  darkness  and  horror.  In  this  case  the  sensation  of  horror 
will  arise  from  the  loss  of  everything  real,  from  the  disappearance  of 
this  world. 

In  order  not  to  experience  the  horror  of  the  new  world,  it  is 
necessary  to  know  it  beforehand,  either  emotionally — by  faith  or 
love;  or  intellectually — by  reason. 

And  in  order  not  to  experience  horror  from  the  loss  of  the  old 
world,  it  is  necessary  to  have  renounced  it  voluntarily  either 
through  faith  or  reason. 

One  must  renounce  all  the  beautiful,  bright  world  in  which  we 
are  living,  one  must  admit  that  it  is  ghostly,  phantasmal,  unreal, 
deceitful,  illusory,  mayavic.  One  must  reconcile  oneself  to  this  un- 
reality, not  be  afraid  of  it,  but  rejoice  at  it.  One  must  give  up 
everything.  One  must  become  poor  in  spirit,  i.  е.,  make  oneself 
poor  by  the  effort  of  one's  spirit. 

This  most  profound  philosophical  truth  is  expressed  in  the 
beautiful  Evangelical  symbol: 

Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit:  for  their's  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

These  words  become  clear  in  the  sense  of  a  renouncement  of  the 
material  world  only.  "Poor  in  spirit"  does  not  mean  poor  mate- 
rially, in  the  worldly  meaning  of  the  word,  and  still  less  does  it 
signify  poverty  of  spirit.  Spiritual  poverty — this  is  the  renounce- 
ment of  matter;  such  "poverty"  is  his  when  a  man  has  no  earth 
under  his  feet,  no  sky  above  his  head. 

Foxes  have  holes,  and  birds  of  the  air  have  nests,  but  the  Son  of  man 
hath  not  where  to  lay  his  head. 

This  is  the  poverty  of  the  man  who  is  entirely  alone,  because 
father,  mother,  other  men,  even  the  nearest  here  on  earth  he  re- 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  269 

gards  as  phantoms,  illusions,  and  renounces  them  because  beyond 
these  phantoms  he  discerns  the  true  substances  that  he  is  striving 
toward,  just  as,  renouncing  the  phenomenal  illusions  of  the  world, 
he  is  approachng  the  truly  real. 

The  moment  of  transition — that  terrible  moment  of  the  loss  of 
the  old  and  the  unfoldment  of  the  new — has  been  represented  in 
innumerable  allegories  in  ancient  literature.  To  make  this  transi- 
tion easy  was  the  purpose  of  the  mysteries.  In  India,  in 
Egypt,  in  Greece,  special  preparatory  rituals  existed,  sometimes 
merely  symbolical,  sometimes  real,  which  actually  brought  a  soul 
to  the  very  portals  of  the  new  world,  and  opened  these  portals  at 
the  moment  of  initiation.  But  no  outward  rituals  and  ceremonies 
could  take  the  place  of  self -initiation.  The  great  work  must  have 
been  going  on  inside  the  soul  and  mind  of  man. 


But  how  can  logic  help  a  man  to  pass  to  the  consciousness  of  a 
new  and  higher  world? 

We  have  seen  that  mathematics  has  already  found  the  path  into 
that  higher  order  of  things.  Penetrating  there,  it  first  of  all  re- 
nounces its  fundamental  axioms  of  identity  and  difference. 

In  the  world  of  infinite  and  fluent  magnitudes,  a  magnitude  may 
be  not  equal  to  itself;  a  part  may  be  equal  to  the  whole;  and  of  two 
equal  magnitudes  one  may  be  infinitely  greater  than  the  other. 

All  this  sounds  like  an  absurdity  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
mathematics  of  finite  and  constant  numbers.  But  the  mathe- 
matics of  finite  and  constant  numbers  is  itself  the  calculation  of 
relations  between  non-existent  magnitudes,  i.  е.,  an  absurdity. 
And  therefore  only  that  which  from  the  standpoint  of  this  math- 
ematics seems  an  absurdity,  can  be  the  truth. 

Logic  now  goes  along  the  same  path.  It  must  renounce  itself, 
come  to  perceive  the  necessity  for  its  own  annihilation — then  out 
of  it  a  new  and  higher  logic  can  arise. 

In  his  "Critique  of  Pure  Reason"  Kant  proved  the  possibility 
of  transcendental  logic. 

Before  Bacon  and  earlier  than  Aristotle,  in  the  ancient  Hindu 
scriptures,  the  formulae  of  this  higher  logic  were  given,  opening 
the  doors  of  mystery.  But  the  meaning  of  these  formulae  was 
rapidly  lost.    They  were  preserved  in  ancient  books,  but  remained 


270  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

there  as  some  strange  mummeries  of  extinguished  thought,  the 
words  without  real  content. 

New  thinkers  again  discovered  these  principles,  and  expressed 
them  in  new  words,  but  again  they  remained  incomprehensible, 
again  they  suffered  transformation  into  some  unnecessary  orna- 
mental form  of  words.  But  the  idea  existed.  A  consciousness  of 
the  possbility  of  finding  and  establishing  the  laws  of  the  higher 
world  was  never  lost.  Mystical  philosophy  never  regarded  the 
logic  of  Aristotle  as  all-embracing  and  all-powerful.  It  built 
its  system  outside  of  logic  or  above  logic,  unconsciously,  going  along 
those  paths  of  thought  paved  in  remote  antiquity. 

The  higher  logic  existed  before  deductive  and  inductive  logic  was 
formulated.  This  higher  logic  may  be  called  intuitive  logic — the 
logic  of  infinity,  the  logic  of  ecstasy. 

Not  only  is  this  logic  possible,  but  it  exists,  and  has  existed  from 
time  immemorial;  it  has  been  formulated  many  times;  it  has 
entered  into  philosophical  systems  as  their  key — but  for  some 
strange  reason  has  not  been  recognized  as  logic. 

It  is  possible  to  deduce  the  system  of  this  logic  from  many 
philosophical  systems.  The  most  precise  and  complete  formula- 
tion of  the  laws  of  higher  logic  I  find  in  the  writings  of  Plotinus, 
in  his  "On  Intelligible  Beauty."  I  shall  quote  this  passage  in  the 
succeeding  chapter. 

I  have  called  this  system  of  higher  logic  Tertium  Organum  be- 
cause for  us  it  is  the  third  organ  of  thought  after  those  of  Aristotle 
and  Bacon.  The  first  was  the  Organon,  the  second,  Novum 
Organum.    But  the  third  existed  earlier  than  the  first. 

Man,  master  of  this  instrument,  may  open  the  door  of  the  world 
of  causes  without  fear. 

The  axioms  which  Tertium  Organum  embrace  cannot  be  for- 
mulated in  our  language.  If  we  attempt  to  formulate  them  in 
spite  of  this,  they  will  produce  the  impression  of  absurdities. 
Taking  the  axioms  of  Aristotle  as  a  model,  we  may  express  the 
principal  axiom  of  the  new  logic  in  our  poor  earthly  language  in 
the  following  manner: 

A  is  both  A  and  not  A. 
or 

Everything  is  both  A  and  not  A. 

or> 

Everything  is  All. 


TERTITJM   ORGANUM  271 

But  these  axioms  are  in  effect  absolutely  impossible.  They  are 
not  the  axioms  of  higher  logic,  they  are  merely  attempts  to  express 
the  axioms  of  this  logic  in  concepts.  In  reality  the  ideas  of  higher 
logic  are  inexpressible  in  concepts.  When  we  encounter  such  an 
inexpressibility  it  means  that  we  have  touched  the  world  of 
causes. 

The  logical  formula:  A  is  both  A  and  not  A,  corresponds  to  the 
mathematical  formula:  A  magnitude  can  be  greater  or  less  than 
itself. 

The  absurdity  of  both  these  propositions  shows  that  they  can- 
not refer  to  our  world.  Of  course  absurdity,  as  such,  is  indeed  not 
an  index  of  the  attributes  of  noumena,  but  the  attributes  of 
noumena  will  certainly  be  expressed  in  what  are  absurdities  to  us. 
To  hope  to  find  in  the  world  of  causes  anything  logical  from  our 
standpoint  is  just  as  useless  as  to  think  that  the  real  world  can  exist 
in  accordance  with  the  laws  of  a  world  of  shadows. 

To  master  the  fundamental  principles  of  higher  logic — this 
means  to  master  the  fundamentals  of  the  understanding  of  a  space 
of  higher  dimensions,  or  of  the  world  of  the  wondrous. 

In  order  to  approach  to  a  clear  understanding  of  the  relations 
of  the  multi-dimensional  world,  we  must  free  ourselves  from  all 
the  "idols"  of  our  world,  as  Bacon  calls  them,  i.  е.,  from  all  ob- 
stacles to  correct  receptivity  and  reasoning.  Then  we  shall  have 
taken  the  most  important  step  toward  an  inner  affinity  with  the 
world  of  the  wondrous. 

A  two-dimensional  being,  in  order  to  approach  to  an  under- 
standing of  the  three-dimensional  world,  first  of  all  must  become 
a  three-dimensional  being,  and  then  rid  itself  of  its  "idols,"  i.  е.,  of 
its  conventional — converted  into  axiomatic — ways  of  feeling  and 
thinking,  which  create  for  it  the  illusion  of  two-dimensionality. 

What  is  it  exactly  from  which  the  two-dimensional  being  must 
liberate  itself? 

First  of  all — and  most  important — from  the  assurance  that 
that  which  it  sees  and  senses  really  exists;  from  this  will  come  the 
consciousness  of  the  incorrectness  of  its  perception  of  the  world, 
and  then  the  idea  that  the  real,  new  world  must  exist  in  quite  other 
forms — new,  incomparable,  incommeasurable  with  relation  to  the 
old  ones.  Then  the  two-dimensional  being  must  overcome  its 
sureness  of  the  correctness  of  its  categories.  It  must  understand 
that  things  which  seem  to  it  different  and  separate  from  one 


272  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

another  may  be  parts  of  some  to  it  incomprehensible  whole,  or 
that  they  have  much  in  common  which  it  does  not  perceive; 
and  that  things  which  seem  to  it  one  and  indivisible  are  in  reality 
infinitely  complex  and  multifarious. 

The  mental  growth  of  the  two-dimensional  being  must  proceed 
along  the  path  of  the  recognition  of  those  common  properties  of 
objects,  unknown  to  it  before,  which  are  the  result  of  their  similar 
origin  or  similar  functions,  incomprehensible  from  the  point  of 
view  of  a  plane. 

When  once  the  two-dimensional  being  has  admitted  the  possi- 
bility of  the  existence  of  hitherto  unknown  common  properties  of 
objects,  which  before  seemed  different,  then  it  has  already  ap- 
proached to  our  own  understanding  of  the  world.  It  has  approached 
to  our  logic,  has  begun  to  understand  the  collective  name,  i.  е.,  a 
word  used  not  as  a  proper  noun,  but  as  an  appellate  noun — a  word 
expressing  a  concept. 

The  "idols"  of  the  two-dimensonal  being,  hindering  the  de- 
velopment of  its  consciousness,  are  those  proper  nouns,  which  it 
itself  has  given  to  all  the  objects  surrounding  it.  For  such  a  being 
each  object  has  its  own  proper  noun,  corresponding  to  its  percep- 
tion of  the  object;  common  names,  corresponding  to  concepts,  it 
knows  not  of.  Only  by  getting  rid  of  these  idols,  by  understand- 
ing that  the  names  of  things  can  be  not  only  proper,  but  common 
ones  as  well,  will  it  be  possible  for  it  to  advance  further,  to  de- 
velop mentally,  to  approach  the  human  understanding  of  the 
world.    Take  the  most  simple  sentence: 

John  and  Peter  are  both  men. 

For  the  two-dimensional  being  this  will  be  an  absurdity,  and  it 
will  represent  the  idea  to  itself  after  this  fashion  : 

John  and  Peter  are  both  Johns  and  Peters. 

In  other  words,  every  one  of  our  logical  propositions  will  be  an 
absurdity  to  it.  Why  this  is  so,  is  clear.  Such  a  being  has  no  con- 
cepts; the  proper  nouns  which  constitute  the  speech  of  such  a  being 
have  no  plural.  It  is  easy  to  understand  that  any  plural  of  our 
speech  will  seem  to  it  an  absurdity. 


Where  are  our  "idols"?  From  what  shall  we  liberate  ourselves 
in  order  to  pass  to  an  understanding  of  the  multi-dimensional 
world? 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  273 

First  of  all,  of  course,  we  must  not  be  three-dimensional.  This 
is  the  prime  condition.  Then  we  must  get  rid  of  our  assurance 
that  we  see  and  sense  that  which  exists  in  reality,  and  that  the 
real  world  is  like  the  world  which  we  see — i.  е.,  we  must  rid  our- 
selves of  the  illusion  of  the  material  world.  We  must  understand 
mentally  all  the  illusoriness  of  the  world  perceived  by  us  in  space 
and  time,  and  know  that  the  real  world  cannot  have  anything  in 
common  with  it;  to  understand  that  it  is  impossible  to  imagine 
the  real  world  in  terms  of  form;  and  finally  we  must  perceive  the 
conditionality  of  the  axioms  of  our  mathematics  and  logic,  related 
as  they  are  to  the  unreal  phenomenal  world. 

In  mathematics  the  idea  of  infinity  will  help  us  to  do  this.  The 
unreality  of  finite  magnitudes  in  comparison  with  infinite  ones  is 
obvious.  In  logic  we  may  dwell  upon  the  idea  of  monism,  i.  е.,  the 
fundamental  unity  of  everything  which  exists. 

The  logic  of  Aristotle  and  of  Bacon  is  at  bottom  dualistic.  If  we 
shall  really  deeply  assimilate  the  idea  of  monism,  we  shall  dethrone 
the  "idol"  of  this  logic. 

The  fundamental  axioms  of  our  logic  reduce  themselves  to 
identity  and  contradiction,  just  as  do  the  axioms  of  mathematics. 
At  the  bottom  of  them  all  lies  the  admission  of  our  general  axiom, 
namely,  that  every  given  something  has  something  opposite  to  it; 
therefore  every  proposition  has  its  anti-proposition,  every  thesis 
has  its  antithesis.  To  the  existence  of  any  thing  is  opposed  the 
non-existence  of  that  thing.  To  the  existence  of  the  world  is  op- 
posed the  non-existence  of  the  world.  Object  is  opposed  to  sub- 
ject; the  objective  world  to  the  subjective;  the  I  is  opposed  to  the 
Not-I;  to  motion — immobility;  to  variability — constancy;  to  unity 
— heterogeneity;  to  truth — falsehood;  to  good — evil.  And  in 
conclusion,  to  every  A  in  general  is  opposed  not  A. 

The  recognition  of  the  reality  of  these  divisions  is  necessary  for 
the  acceptance  of  the  fundamental  axioms  of  the  logic  of  Aristotle 
and  Bacon,  i.  е.,  the  absolute  and  incontestable  recognition  of  the 
duality  of  the  world — of  dualism.  The  recognition  of  the  unreality 
of  these  divisions  and  that  of  the  unity  of  all  opposites,  is  necessary 
for  the  comprehension  of  higher  logic. 


At  the  very  beginning  of  this  book  the  existence  of  the  world 
and  consciousness  was  admitted — the  I  and  the  Not-I,  i.  е.,  the 


274  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

reality  of  the  dual  division  of  everything  existent,  because  all 
other  opposites  are  derived  from  the  opposition  of  the  I  and  the 
Not-I. 

Thereafter  was  elucidated  the  possibility  of  the  expansion  of 
consciousness  up  to  the  complete  absorption  by  it  of  the  whole 
world.  We  recognized  that  one  I  could  include  within  itself 
everything  Not-I;  we  recognized  that  the  division  into  I  and 
Not-I  is  conditional,  that  it  is  necessary  with  a  certain  degree  of 
knowledge  of  the  world,  but  that  it  denies  itself  when  knowledge 
passes  over  to  the  higher  degree.  Duality  is  the  condition  of  our 
knowledge  of  the  phenomenal  (three-dimensional)  world;  this  is 
the  instrument  of  our  knowledge  of  phenomena.  But  when  we 
come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  noumenal  world  (or  the  world  of 
many  dimensions),  this  duality  begins  to  hinder  us,  appears  as  an 
obstacle  to  knowledge. 

Dualism  is  the  chief  "idol";  let  us  free  ourselves  from  it. 

The  two-dimensional  being,  in  order  to  comprehend  the  rela- 
tions of  things  in  three  dimensions,  and  our  logic,  must  renounce 
its  "idol" — the  absolute  singularity  of  objects  which  permits  it  to 
call  them  solely  by  their  proper  names. 

We,  in  order  to  comprehend  the  world  of  many  dimensions, 
must  renounce  the  idol  of  duality. 

But  the  application  of  monism  to  practical  thought  meets  the 
insurmountable  obstacle  of  our  language.  Our  language  is  incap- 
able of  expressing  the  unity  of  opposites,  just  as  it  cannot  express 
spatially  the  relation  of  cause  to  effect.  Therefore  we  must  recon- 
cile ourselves  to  the  fact  that  all  attempts  to  express  super-logical 
relations  in  our  language  will  seem  absurdities,  and  really  can  only 
give  hints  at  that  which  we  wish  to  express. 

Thus  the  formula, 

A  is  both  A  and  not  A, 
or, 

Everything  is  both  A  and  not  A, 

representing  the  principal  axioms  of  higher  logic,  expressed  in  our 
language  of  concepts,  sounds  absurd  from  the  standpoint  of  our 
usual  logic,  and  is  not  essentially  true. 

Let  us  therefore  reconcile  ourselves  to  the  fact  that  it  is  im- 
possible to  express  super-logical  relations  in  our  language  as  it  is 
at  present  constituted. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  275 

The  formula,  "A  is  both  A  and  not  A"  is  untrue  because  in  the 
world  of  causes  there  exists  no  opposition  between  "A"  and 
"not  A."  But  we  cannot  express  their  real  relation.  It  would  be 
more  correct  to  say: 

A  is  all. 

But  this  also  would  be  untrue,  because  "A"  is  not  only  all,  but 
also  an  arbitrary  part  of  all. 

This  is  exactly  the  thing  which  our  language  cannot  express. 
It  is  to  this  that  we  must  accustom  our  thought,  and  train  it  along 
these  lines. 

Thinking  of  our  consciousness,  we  shall  cease  to  regard  it  either 
as  individual,  or  as  a  part  of  the  world's  consciousness.  Conceiving 
of  the  possibility  of  the  survival  of  consciousness  after  death,  we 
shall  not  ask  ourselves  if  the  individuality  of  our  consciousness  will 
be  preserved,  or  if  it  will  merge  into  the  infinite  consciousness  of 
the  world  and  be  lost  in  it. 

In  the  book,  "L'Inde  sans  les  Anglais,"  which  I  call  to  mind  in 
this  connection,  Pierre  Loti  goes  to  India  to  get  acquainted  with 
Hindu  wisdom,  and  more  particularly  with  the  ideas  of  Hindu 
philosophy  on  the  subject  of  death.  In  his  opinion  European 
(Christian)  thought  cannot  renounce  the  idea  of  the  individual 
existence  of  consciousness  after  death,  but  the  thought  of  the 
Orient  renounces  this  idea  completely,  and  reconciles  itself  to  the 
thought  that  consciousness  will  diffuse  itself  throughout  the 
world,  ceasing  to  be  as  an  individuality.  Loti  cannot  reconcile 
himself  to  the  idea  of  "the  cessation  of  personality"  and  he  strives 
to  find  an  answer  to  the  question:  will  he  remain  himself  after 
death,  for  to  the  European  mind  only  such  a  continuation  of  exist- 
ence appears  valid. 

Loti's  view  is  a  typical  one.  It  is  the  characteristic  projection 
of  the  relations  of  our  three-dimensional  world  into  the  world  of 
causes.  But  our  consciousness  is  not  phenomenal  but  noumenal. 
It  is  not  subject  to  the  laws  of  the  three-dimensional  world.  It 
must  be  neither  individual  nor  a  part  of  the  world's  consciousness; 
nor  can  it  be  one  thing  before  the  death  of  the  body,  and  another 
thing  after  the  death  of  the  body.  If  it  exists,  then  it  exists  inva- 
riably; its  manifestation  in  our  sphere  alone  varies.  As  noumenon 
it  must  embrace  within  itself  all  possibilities,  be  both  A  and  not  A, 


276  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

i.  C,  BE  SIMULTANEOUSLY  INDIVIDUAL,  AND  A  PART  OF  THE  WORLD'S 
CONSCIOUSNESS,  AND  THE  REFLECTION  OF  THE  ENTIRE  CONSCIOUS- 
NESS OF  THE  WORLD. 

We  must  understand  that  it  cannot  be  this  от  another,  but  must  be 
both  this  and  another.  Every  individual  consciousness  is  the 
reflection  of  the  whole  world's  consciousness,  and  it  cannot  be  a 
part  of  anything. 

We  must  train  our  thought  to  the  idea  that  separateness  and 
inclusiveness  are  not  opposed  in  the  real  world,  but  exist  together 
and  simultaneously  without  contradicting  one  another.  Let  us 
understand  that  in  the  real  world  one  and  the  same  thing  can  be 
both  a  part  and  the  whole,  i.  е.,  that  the  whole,  without  changing, 
can  be  its  own  part;  understand  that  there  are  no  opposites  in 
general,  that  everything  is  a  certain  image  of  all. 

And  then,  beginning  to  understand  all  this,  we  shall  grasp  the 
separate  ideas  concerning  the  essentials  of  the  "noumenal  world," 
or  the  world  of  many  dimensions  in  which  we  really  live. 

In  such  case  the  higher  logic,  even  with  its  imperfect  formulae, 
as  they  appear  in  our  rough  language  of  concepts,  represents  in 
spite  of  this  a  powerful  instrument  of  knowledge  of  the  world,  our 
only  means  of  preservation  from  deceptions. 

The  application  of  this  instrument  of  thought  gives  the  key  to 
the  mysteries  of  nature,  to  the  world  as  it  is. 


Let  us  endeavor  to  enumerate  those  properties  of  the  world  of 
causes  which  result  from  all  the  foregoing. 

It  is  first  of  all  necessary  to  reiterate  that  it  is  impossible  to  ex- 
press in  words  the  properties  of  the  world  of  causes.  Every 
thought  expressed  about  them  will  he  false.  That  is,  we  may  say 
in  relation  to  the  "ideal  world"  that  "every  spoken  thought  is  a  lie." 
It  is  possible  to  speak  about  it  only  conditionally,  by  hints,  by 
symbols.  And  if  one  interprets  literally  anything  said  about  it, 
nothing  but  absurdity  results.  Generally  speaking,  everything 
said  in  words  regarding  the  world  of  causes  is  likely  to  seem  absurd, 
and  is  in  reality  its  mutilation.  The  truth  it  is  impossible  to  ex- 
press; it  is  possible  only  to  give  a  hint  at  it,  to  give  an  impulse  to 
thought.  But  every  one  must  discover  the  truth  for  himself. 
"Another's  truth"  is  worse  than  a  lie,  because  it  is  two  lies.    This 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  277 

explains  why  truth  very  often  can  be  expressed  only  by  means  of 
paradox. 

What,  then,  are  we  able  to  say  about  the  world  of  many  dimen- 
sions, about  the  world  of  noumena,  or  world  of  causes? 

1.  In  that  world  "time"  must  exist  spatially,  i.  е.,  temporal 
events  must  exist  and  not  happen— exist  before  and  after  their 
manifestation,  and  be  located  in  one  section,  as  it  were.  Effects 
must  exist  simultaneously  with  causes.  That  which  we  name  the 
law  of  causality  cannot  exist  there,  because  time  is  a  necessary  con- 
dition for  it.  There  cannot  be  anything  which  is  measured  by 
years,  days,  hours— there  cannot  be  before,  now,  after.  Moments 
of  different  epochs,  divided  by  great  intervals  of  time,  exist  sim- 
ultaneously, and  may  touch  one  another.  Along  with  this,  all  the 
possibilities  of  a  given  moment,  even  those  opposite  to  one  another, 
and  all  their  results  up  to  infinity,  must  be  actualized  simultane- 
ously with  a  given  moment. 

2.  There  is  nothing  measurable  by  our  measures,  nothing 
commensurable  with  our  objects,  nothing  greater  or  /ess  than  our 
objects.  There  is  nothing  situated  on  the  right  or  left  side,  above 
or  below  one  of  our  objects.  There  is  nothing  similar  to  our  ob- 
jects, lines  or  figures.  Different  points  in  our  space,  divided  for 
us  by  enormous  distances,  may  meet  there.  "Distance"  or 
"proximity"  are  there  defined  by  inner  "aflBnity"  or  "remote- 
ness," by  sympathy  or  antipathy,  i.  е.,  by  properties  which  seem 
to  us  to  be  subjective. 

3.  There  is  neither  matter  nor  motion.  There  is  nothing  that 
could  possibly  be  weighed,  or  photographed,  or  expressed  in  the 
formulas  of  physical  energy.  There  is  nothing  which  has  form, 
color,  or  odor— nothing  possessing  the  properties  of  physical  bodies. 

4.  There  is  nothing  dead  or  unconscious.  Everything  lives, 
everything  breathes,  thinks,  feels;  everything  is  conscious,  and 
everything  speaks. 

5.  In  that  world  the  axioms  of  our  mathematics  cannot  be  ap- 
plied, because  there  is  nothing  finite.  Everything  there  is  infinite 
and,  from  our  standpoint,  variable. 

6.  The  laws  of  our  logic  cannot  act  there.  From  the  stand- 
point of  our  logic,  that  world  is  illogical  This  is  the  realm  the 
laws  of  which  are  expressed  in  Tertium  Organum. 

7.  The  separateness  of  our  world  does  not  exist  there.  Every- 
thing is  the  whole.    And  each  particle  of  dust,  without  mentioning 


278  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

of  course  every  life  and  every  human  consciousness,  lives  a  life 
which  is  one  with  the  whole  and  includes  the  whole  within  itself. 

8.  In  that  world  the  duality  of  our  world  cannot  exist.  There 
being  is  not  opposed  to  non-being.  Life  is  not  opposed  to  death. 
On  the  contrary,  the  one  includes  the  other  within  itself.  The 
unity  and  multiplicity  of  the  I;  the  I  and  the  Not-I,  motion  and 
immobility;  union  and  separateness ;  good  and  evil;  truth  and 
falsehood — all  these  divisions  are  impossible  there.  Everything 
subjective  is  objective,  and  everything  objective  is  subjective.  That 
world  is  the  world  of  the  unity  of  opposites. 

9.  The  sensation  of  the  reality  of  that  world  must  be  accom- 
panied by  the  sensation  of  the  unreality  of  this  one.  At  the  same 
time  the  difference  between  real  and  unreal  cannot  exist  there, 
just  as  the  difference  between  subjective  and  objective  cannot 
exist. 

10.  That  world  and  our  world  are  not  two  different  worlds.  The 
world  is  one.  That  which  we  call  our  world  is  merely  our  incor- 
rect perception  of  the  world:  the  world  seen  by  us  through  a  narrow 
slit.  That  world  begins  to  be  sensed  by  us  as  the  wondrous,  i.  е.,  as 
something  opposite  to  the  reality  of  this  world,  and  at  the  same 
time  this,  our  earthly  world,  begins  to  seem  unreal.  The  sense  of 
the  wondrous  is  the  key  to  that  world. 

'{  i 


!5 


™* 


$un 


' 


IT 


?rr 


<?"r-    Ji«r. 


Л/°  /r 


WIS 


/\v 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

'Theosoohv"  of  Max  Muller.  Ancient  India.  Philosophy  of  the 
Vedanta  Tattwamad.  Knowledge  by  means  of  the  expansion  of 
lonscbusness  as  a  reality.  Mysticism  of  different  ages ^and  . peop  e, 
TJnitv  of  experiences.  Terhum  Organum  as  a  key  to  mysticism. 
Siens  of  th^noumenal  world.  Treatise  of  Plotmus  "  On  Intelligible 
Beauty" as  a  misunderstood  system  of  higher  logic.  lamina  ion 
ш  Jacob  Boehme.  "A  harp  of  many  strings,  of  which  each  string 
^a  senate  inurnment,  while  the  whole  is  only  one  harp  Mys- 
cs  of  ''The  Love  of  the  Good."  St.  Avva  Dorotheus  and  others^ 
Sment  of  Alexandria.  Lao-Tzu  and  Chuang-Tzu.  "Light  on  the 
Path''  "The  Voice  of  the  Silence."  Mohammedan  mystics. 
Poetrv  of  the  Sufis.  Mystical  states  under  narcotics.  The  Anaes- 
KdS  Experiments  of  Prof.  James.  Dostoyevsky  on 
"time"  (The  Idiot).    Influence  of  nature  on  the  soul  of  man. 

О  trace  historically  the  process  of  the  development  of 
those  ideas  and  systems  founded  upon  higher  logic  or 
proceeding  from  it,  would  indeed  be  a  matter  of  great 
interest  and  importance.  But  this  would  be  difficult 
,  and  almost  impossible  of  accomplishment  because  we 
lack  definite  knowledge  of  the  time  and  origin,  the  means  of 
transmitting,  and  the  sequence  of  ideas  in  ancient  phi  osophical 
systems  and  religious  teachings.  There  are  innumerable  guesses 
and  speculations  concerning  the  manner  of  this  succession.  Many 
of  these  guesses  and  speculations  are  accepted  as  unquestioned 
until  new  ones  appear  which  controvert  them.  The  opinions  of 
different  investigators  in  regard  to  these  questions  are  very 
divergent,  and  the  truth  is  of  ten  difficult  to  determine.  Partic- 
ularly conducive  to  confusion  are  the  so-called  theosophical 
authors,  as  for  example,  Schure,  С  W.  Leadbeater,  Dr.  Rudolph 
Steiner  and  others,  who  know  everything. 

I  shall  not  dwell  at  all  on  the  question  of  the  succession  of  ideas, 
either  from  the  historical  or  any  other  point  of  view. 

The  proposed  outline  of  systems  which  refer  to  the ^  world  of 
noumena  is  not  intended  to  be  complete.  This  is  not  the  history 
of  thought,"  but  merely  examples  of  movements  of  thought  which 


280  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

led  to  the  same  conclusions  as  those  at  which  I  have  arrived  in 
this  book.  

In  the  book  "Theosophy"  (or  "Psychological  Religion"),  the 
noted  scholar  Max  Muller  gives  an  interesting  analysis  of  mystical 
religions  and  mystical  philosophical  systems.  He  dwells  much  on 
India  and  her  teachings. 

"That  which  we  can  study  nowhere  but  in  India  is  the  all  ab- 
sorbing influence  which  religion  and  philosophy  may  exercise  on 
the  human  mind.  So  far  as  we  can  judge  a  large  class  of  people  in 
India,  not  only  the  priestly  class,  but  the  nobility  also,  not  men 
only  but  women,  never  looked  upon  their  life  on  earth  as  some- 
thing real.  What  was  real  to  them  was  the  invisible,  the  life  to 
come.  What  formed  the  theme  of  their  conversations,  what 
formed  the  subject  of  their  meditations,  was  the  real  that  alone 
lent  some  kind  of  reality  to  this  unreal  phenomenal  world.  Who- 
ever was  supposed  to  have  caught  a  new  ray  of  truth  was  visited 
by  young  and  old,  was  honored  by  princes  and  by  kings,  was 
looked  upon  indeed  as  holding  a  position  far  above  that  of  kings 
and  princes.  This  is  the  side  of  life  of  ancient  India  which  deserves 
our  study,  because  there  has  been  nothing  like  it  in  the  whole 
world,  not  even  in  Greece  or  Palestine. 

"I  know  quite  well,  says  Muller,  that  there  never  can  be  a  whole 
nation  of  philosophers  or  metaphysical  dreamers  .  and  we 

must  never  forget  that  all  through  history,  it  is  the  few,  not  the 
many,  who  impress  their  character  on  a  nation,  and  have  a  right 
to  represent  it  as  a  whole.  What  do  we  know  of  Greece  at  the 
time  of  the  Ionian  and  Eleatic  philosophers,  except  the  utterances 
of  Seven  Sages?  What  do  we  know  of  the  Jews  at  the  time  of 
Moses,  except  the  traditions  preserved  in  the  Laws  and  the 
Prophets?  It  is  the  prophets,  the  poets,  the  lawgivers  and  teach- 
ers, however  small  their  number,  who  speak  in  the  name  of  the 
people,  and  who  alone  stand  out  to  represent  the  nondescript 
multitude  behind  them,  to  speak  their  thoughts  and  to  express 
their  sentiments. 

"Real  Indian  philosophy,  even  in  that  embryonic  form  in  which 
we  find  it  in  the  Upanishads,  stands  completely  by  itself.  And  if 
we  ask  what  was  the  highest  purpose  of  the  teachings  of  the 
Upanishads  we  can  state  it  in  three  words,  as  it  has  been  stated 
by  the  greatest  Veddnta*  teachers  themselves,  namely  Tat  twam 

*Vedanta  is  the  end  of  the  Vedas,  the  abridgment  and  commentaries  on  the  Vedas.     P.  Ouspensky  . 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  281 

asi.  This  means  Thou  art  That.  That  stands  for  That  which  is 
known  to  us  under  different  names  in  different  systems  of  ancient 
and  modern  philosophy.  It  is  Zeus  or  the  Eis  Theos  or  to  on 
in  Greece;  it  is  what  Plato  meant  by  the  Eternal  Idea,  what  Agnos- 
tics call  the  Unknowable,  what  I  call  the  Infinite  in  Nature.  This 
is  what  in  India  is  called  Brahman,  the  being  behind  all  beings, 
the  power  that  emits  the  universe,  sustains  it  and  draws  it  back 
again  to  itself.  The  Thou  is  what  I  called  the  Infinite  in  man,  the 
Soul,  the  Self,  the  being  behind  every  human  Ego,  free  from  all 
bodily  fetters,  free  from  passions,  free  from  all  attachments 
(Atman).  The  expression:  Thou  art  That — means:  thy  soul  is 
the  Brahman;  or  in  other  words,  the  subject'and  the  object  of  all 
being  and  of  all  knowing  are  one  and  the  same. 

"This  is  the  gist  of  what  I  call  Psychological  Religion  or 
Theosophy,  the  highest  summit  of  thought  which  the  human  mind 
has  reached,  which  has  found  different  expressions  in  different 
religions  and  philosophies,  but  nowhere  such  a  clear  and  powerful 
realization  as  in  the  ancient  Upanishads  of  India. 


Max  Miiller  calls  our  attention  to  the  fact  that  this  recognition 
of  the  identity  of  the  That  and  Thou,  is  not  satisfied  with  mere 
poetical  metaphor  such  as  that  the  human  soul  emanated  from  the 
divine  soul  or  was  a  portion  of  it;  no,  what  is  asserted  is  the  sub- 
stantial identity  of  what  had  for  a  time  been  wrongly  distinguished 
as  the  subject  and  object  of  the  world. 

"For  as  long  as  the  individual  soul  does  not  free  itself  from 
Nescience,  or  a  belief  in  duality,  it  takes  something  else  for  itself. 
True  knowledge  of  the  Self  or  true  self  knowledge,  expresses  itself 
in  the  words,  'Thou  art  That'  or  '/  am  Brahman/  the  nature  of 
Brahman  being  unchangeable  eternal  cognition.  Until  that  stage 
has  been  reached,  the  individual  soul  is  fettered  by  the  body,  by 
the  organs  of  sense,  nay  even  by  the  mind  and  its  various  func- 
tions. 

"The  Soul  (The  Self)  says  the  Vedanta  philosopher,  cannot  be 
different  from  the  Brahman,  because  Brahman  comprehends  all 
reality  and  nothing  that  really  is  can  therefore  be  different  from 
Brahman.  Secondly,  the  individual  self  cannot  be  conceived  as  a 
modification  of  Brahman,  because  Brahman  by  itself  cannot  be 
changed,  whether  by  itself,  because  it  is  one  and  perfect  in  itself. 


282  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

or  by  anything  outside  of  it  (because  there  exists  nothing  outside 
of  it).  Here  we  see,  says  Miiller,  the  Vedantist  moving  on  exactly 
the  same  stratum  of  thought  in  which  the  Eleatic  philosophers 
moved  in  Greece.  If  there  is  one  Infinite,'  they  said,  'there  cannot 
be  another,  for  the  other  would  limit  the  one,  and  thus  render  it 
finite.  So,  as  applied  to  God,  the  Eleatics  argued,  'If  God  is  to 
be  the  mightiest  and  the  best,  he  must  be  one,  for  if  there  were 
two  or  more,  he  would  not  be  the  mightiest  and  best.'  The 
Eleatics  continued  their  monistic  argument  by  showing  that  this 
One  Infinite  Being  cannot  be  divided,  so  that  anything  could  be 
called  a  portion  of  it,  because  there  is  no  power  that  could  separate 
anything  from  it.  Nay,  it  cannot  even  have  parts,  for,  as  it  has 
no  beginning  and  no  end,  it  can  have  no  parts,  for  a  part  has  a 
beginning  and  an  end. 

"These  Eleatic  ideas — namely  that  there  is  and  there  can  be 
only  One  Absolute  Being,  infinite,  unchangeable,  without  a 
second,  without  parts  and  passions — are  the  same  ideas  which 
underlie  the  Upanishads  and  have  been  fully  worked  out  in  the 
Veddnta-Sutras. 

"In  most  of  the  religions  of  the  ancient  world,  says  Miiller,  the 
relation  between  the  soul  and  God  has  been  represented  as  a 
return  of  the  soul  to  God.  A  yearning  for  God,  a  kind  of  divine 
home-sickness,  finds  expression  in  most  religions,  but  the  road 
that  is  to  lead  us  home,  and  the  reception  which  the  soul  may 
expect  in  the  Father's  house  have  been  represented  in  very 
different  ways  in  different  religions. 

"According  to  some  religious  teachers,  a  return  of  the  soul  to 
God  is  possible  after  death  only.    .    . 

"According  to  other  religious  teachers,  the  final  beatitude  of  the 
soul  can  be  achieved  in  this  life.  .  .  That  beatitude  requires 
knowledge  only,  knowledge  of  the  necessary  unity  of  what  is  divine 
in  man  with  what  is  divine  in  God.  The  Brahmins  call  it  self- 
knowledge,  that  is  to  say,  the  knowledge  that  our  true  self,  if  it 
is  anything,  can  only  be  that  Self  which  is  All  in  All,  and  beside 
which  there  is  nothing  else.  Sometimes  this  conception  of  the 
intimate  relation  between  the  human  and  the  divine  natures 
comes  suddenly,  as  the  result  of  an  unexplained  intuition  or  self- 
recollection.  Sometimes,  however,  it  seems  as  if  the  force  of 
logic  had  driven  the  human  mind  to  the  same  result.    If  God  had 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  283 

once  been  recognized  as  the  Infinite  in  nature  and  the  soul  as 
the  Infinite  in  man,  it  seemed  to  follow  that  there  could  not  be 
two  Infinites.  The  Eleatics  had  clearly  passed  through  a  similar 
phase  of  thought  in  their  own  philosophy.  If  there  is  an  Infinite, 
they  said,  it  is  one,  for  if  there  were  two  they  could  not  be  Infinite, 
but  would  be  finite  one  towards  the  other.  But  that  which 
exists  is  infinite,  and  there  cannot  be  more  such.  Therefore  that 
which  exists  is  one. 

"Nothing  can  be  more  definite  than  this  Eleatic  Monism,  and 
with  it  the  admission  of  a  soul,  the  Infinite  in  man,  as  different 
from  God,  the  Infinite  in  nature,  would  have  been  inconceivable. 

"In  India  it  was  so  expressed  that  Brahman  and  Atman  (the 
spirit)  were  in  their  nature  one. 

"The  early  Christians  also,  at  least  those  who  had  been  brought 
up  in  the  schools  of  Neo-platonist  philosophy  had  a  clear  percep- 
tion that  if  the  soul  is  infinite  and  immortal  in  its  nature,  it  cannot 
be  anything  beside  God,  but  that  it  must  be  of  God  and  in  God. 
St.  Paul  gave  but  his  own  bold  expression  to  the  same  faith  or 
knowledge,  when  he  uttered  the  words  which  have  startled  so 
many  theologians :  In  Him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being. 
If  anyone  else  had  uttered  these  words  they  would  at  once  have 
been  condemned  as  pantheism.  No  doubt  they  are  pantheism, 
and  yet  they  express  the  very  key-note  of  Christianity.  The 
divine  sonship  of  man  is  only  a  metaphorical  expression  but  it 
was  meant  originally  to  embody  the  same  idea.  .  .  And  when 
the  question  was  asked  how  the  consciousness  of  this  divine  son- 
ship  could  ever  have  been  lost,  the  answer  given  by  Christianity 
was,  by  sin,  the  answer  given  by  the  Upanishads  was,  by  avidya, 
nescience.  This  marks  the  similarity,  and  at  the  same  time  the 
characteristic  difference  between  these  two  religions.  The  ques- 
tion how  nescience  laid  hold  on  the  human  soul,  and  made  it  imag- 
ine that  it  could  live  or  move  or  have  its  true  being  anywhere 
but  in  Brahman,  remains  as  unanswerable  in  Hindu  philosophy 
as  in  Christianity  the  question  how  sin  first  came  into  the  world. 


"Both  philosophies,  that  of  the  East  and  that  of  the  West,  says 
Muller,  start  from  a  common  point,  namely  from  the  conviction 
that  our  ordinary  knowledge  is  uncertain,  if  not  altogether  wrong. 
This  revolt  of  the  human  mind  against  itself  is  the  first  step  in  all 
philosophy. 


284  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

"In  our  own  philosophical  language  we  may  put  the  question 
thus:  how  did  the  real  become  phenomenal,  and  how  can  the 
phenomenal  become  real  again?  Or,  in  other  words,  how  was  the 
infinite  changed  into  the  finite,  how  was  the  eternal  changed  into 
the  temporal,  and  how  can  the  temporal  regain  its  eternal  nature? 
Or,  to  put  it  into  more  familiar  language,  how  was  this  world 
created,  and  how  can  it  be  uncreated  again? 

"Nescience  or  avidya  is  regarded  as  the  cause  of  the  phenomenal 
semblance. 

"In  the  Upanishads  the  meaning  of  Brahman  changes.  Some- 
times it  is  almost  an  objective  God,  existing  separately  from  the 
world.  But  then  we  see  Brahman  as  the  essence  of  all  things.  .  . 
and  the  soul  knowing  that  it  is  no  longer  separated  from  that 
essence,  learns  the  highest  lesson  of  the  whole  Veddnta  doctrine: 
Tat  twam  asi;  'Thou  art  That,'  that  is  to  say,  'Thou,  who  for  a 
time  didst  seem  to  be  something  by  thyself,  art  that,  art  really 
nothing  apart  from  the  divine  essence.'  To  know  Brahman  is  to 
be  Brahman.     .     .     . 

"Almost  in  the  same  words  as  the  Eleatic  philosophers  and  the 
German  mystics  of  the  fourteenth  century,  the  Vendantists  argue 
that  it  would  be  self-contradictory  to  admit  that  there  could  be 
anything  besides  the  Infinite  or  Brahman,  which  is  All  in  All  and 
that  therefore  the  soul  also  cannot  be  anything  different  from  it, 
can  never  claim  a  separate  and  independent  existence. 

"Brahman  has  to  be  conceived  as  perfect,  and  therefore  un- 
changeable, the  soul  cannot  be  conceived  as  a  real  modification 
or  deterioration  of  Brahman. 

"And  as  Brahman  has  neither  beginning  nor  end,  neither  can 
it  have  any  parts;  therefore  the  soul  cannot  be  a  part  of  Brahman, 
but  the  whole  of  Brahman  must  be  present  in  every  individual 
soul.  This  is  the  same  as  the  teaching  of  Plotinus,  who  held 
with  equal  consistency,  that  the  True  Being  is  totally  present  in 
every  part  of  the  Universe. 

"  TheVedanta-philosophy  rests  on  the  fundamental  thesis  that  the 
soul  or  the  Absolute  Being  or  Brahman,  are  one  in  their  essence.   .   . 

"The  fundamental  principle  of  the  Vedanta-philosophy  is  that  in 
reality  there  exists  and  there  can  exist  nothing  but  Brahman,  that 
Brahman  is  everything. 

"In  India,  as  anywhere  else,  man  imagines  at  first  that  he,  in 
his  individual,  bodily,  and  spiritual  character,  is  something  that 
exists,  and  that  all  the  objects  of  the  outer  world  also  exist,  as 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  285 

objects.  Idealistic  philosophy  has  swept  away  this  world-old 
prejudice  more  thoroughly  in  India  than  anywhere  else. 

"The  nescience  (which  creates  the  separation  between  the  indi- 
vidual soul  and  Brahman)  can  be  removed  by  science  or  knowledge 
only.  And  this  knowledge  or  vidya  is  imparted  by  the  Veddnta, 
which  shows  that  all  our  ordinary  knowledge  is  simply  the  result  of 
ignorance  or  nescience,  is  uncertain,  deceitful,  and  perishable,  or 
as  we  should  say,  is  phenomenal,  relative,  and  conditioned.  The 
true  knowledge  or  complete  insight  cannot  be  gained  by  sensuous 
perception  nor  by  inference.  According  to  the  orthodox  Vedantist, 
Sruti  alone,  or  what  is  called  revelation,  can  impart  that  knowl- 
edge and  remove  that  nescience  which  is  innate  in  human  nature. 

"Of  the  Higher  Brahman  nothing  can  be  predicated,  but  that  it 
is,  and  that  through  our  nescience,  it  appears  to  be  this  or  that. 

"When  a  great  Indian  sage  was  asked  to  describe  Brahman,  he 
was  simply  silent — that  was  his  answer. 

"When  it  is  said  that  Brahman  is,  that  means  at  the  same  time 
that  Brahman  is  not;  that  is  to  say,  that  Brahman  is  nothing  of 
what  is  supposed  to  exist  in  our  sensuous  perceptions. 

"Whatever  we  may  think  of  this  philosophy,  we  cannot  deny 
its  metaphysical  boldness  and  its  logical  consistency.  If  Brahman 
is  all  in  all,  the  One  without  a  second,  nothing  can  be  said  to  exist 
that  is  not  Brahman.  There  is  no  room  for  anything  outside  the 
infinite  and  Universal,  nor  is  there  room  for  two  infinites,  for  the 
infinite  in  nature  and  the  infinite  in  man.  There  is  and  there  can 
be  one  infinite,  one  Brahman  only.  This  is  the  beginning  and  the 
end  of  the  Veddnta. 

"As  the  shortest  summary  of  the  ideas  of  the  Veddnta  two 
verses  of  Sankara,  the  commentator  and  interpreter  of  Veddnta 
are  often  quoted: 

'Brahma  is  true,  the  world  is  false. 
The  soul  is  Brahma  and  is  nothing  else.' 
This  is  really  a  very  perfect  summary.  What  truly  and  really 
exists  is  Brahman,  the  One  Absolute  Being;  the  world  is  false,  or 
rather  is  not  what  it  seems  to  be;  that  is,  everything  which  is  pre- 
sented to  us  by  means  of  senses  is  phenomenal  and  relative,  and  can 
be  nothing  else.  The  soul  again,  or  rather  every  man's  soul  though 
it  may  seem  to  be  this  or  that,  is  in  reality  nothing  but  Brahma. 

"In  relation  to  the  question  of  the  origin  of  the  world  two 
famous  commentators  of  the   Veddnta,  Sankara  and  Rdmdnuga 


286  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

differ.  Rdmdnuga  holds  to  the  theory  of  evolution,  Sankara — to 
the  theory  of  illusion. 

"It  is  very  important  to  observe  that  the  Vedantist  does  not 
go  so  far  as  certain  Buddhist  philosophers  who  look  upon  the 
phenomenal  world  as  simply  nothing.  No,  their  world  is  real,  only 
it  is  not  what  it  seems  to  be.  Sankara  claims  for  the  phenomenal 
world  a  reality  sufficient  for  all  practical  purposes,  sufficient  to 
determine  our  practical  life,  our  moral  obligations. 

"There  is  a  veil.  But  the  Vedanta-philosophy  teaches  us  that 
the  eternal  light  behind  it  can  always  be  perceived  more  or  less 
clearly  through  philosophical  knowledge.  It  can  be  perceived, 
because  in  reality  it  is  always  there. 

"Though  by  a  different  way,  the  Vedantist  arrived  really  in  the 
end  at  the  same  result  as  Kant  and  more  recent  philosophers  who 
hold  with  Kant  that  '  our  experience  supplies  us  only  with  modes 
of  the  Unconditioned  as  presented  under  the  conditions  of  our 
consciousness.'  It  is  these  conditions  or  limitations  of  human 
consciousness  which  were  called  in  India  Avidyd;  their  result  is 
Maya — the  illusory  world. 

"  It  may  seem  strange  to  find  the  results  of  the  philosophy  of  Kant 
and  his  followers  thus  anticipated  under  varying  expressions  in 
the  Upanishads  and  in  the  Vedanta-philosophy  of  ancient  India." 

In  the  chapters  about  the  Logos  and  about  Christian  Theosophy 
Max  Muller  says  that  religion  is  the  bridge  between  the  Visible 
and  the  Invisible,  between  Finite  and  Infinite. 

"It  may  be  truly  said  that  the  founders  of  the  religions  of  the 
world  have  all  been  bridge-builders.  As  soon  as  the  existence  of  a 
Beyond,  of  a  Heaven  above  the  earth,  of  Powers  above  us  and 
beneath  us  has  been  recognized,  a  great  gulf  seemed  to  be  fixed 
between  what  was  called  by  various  names,  the  earthly  and  the 
heavenly,  the  material  world  and  the  spiritual,  the  phenomenal 
and  noumenal,  or  best  of  all,  the  visible  and  the  invisible  world — 
and  it  was  the  chief  object  of  religion  to  unite  these  two  worlds, 
whether  by  the  arches  of  hope  and  fear  or  by  the  iron  chains  of 
logical  syllogisms. 

"The  idea  of  the  Logos  represented  such  a  bridge.  It  took  many 
different  forms,  expressing  the  first  Divine  Thought  and  then  de- 
veloped into  the  idea  of  the  Son  of  God  incarnated  on  the  earth. 
Around  this  idea  the  mythological  element  of  ancient  religions 
accumulated." 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  287 

Among  contemporary  thinkers  the  noted  psychologist,  Prof. 
William  James  (recently  deceased)  approached  nearer  than  all 
others  to  the  ideas  of  Max  Muller's  theosophy. 

In  the  last  chapter  of  his  book  "The  Varieties  of  Religious  Ex- 
perience," Prof.  James  says: 

"The  warring  gods  and  formulas  of  the  various  religions  do  in- 
deed cancel  each  other,  but  there  is  a  certain  uniform  deliverance 
in  which  religions  all  appear  to  meet — this  is  the  liberation  of  the 
soul  .  .  Man  becomes  conscious  that  if  his  higher  part  is 
conterminous  and  continuous  with  a  more  of  the  same  quality, 
which  is  operative  in  the  universe  outside  of  him,  and  which  he  can 
keep  in  working  touch  with,  and  in  a  fashion  get  on  board  of  and 
save  himself  when  all  his  lower  being  has  gone  to  pieces  in  the  wreck. 

"What  is  the  objective  'Truth'  of  contents  of  religious  experi- 
ences? Is  such  a  'more'  merely  our  own  notion,  or  does  it  really 
exist?  If  so,  in  what  shape  does  it  exist?  And  in  what  form 
should  we  conceive  of  that  'union'  with  it  of  which  religious 
geniuses  are  so  convinced? 

"It  is  answering  these  questions  that  the  various  theologies 
perform  their  theoretic  work,  and  that  their  divergencies  most 
come  to  light.  They  all  agree  that  the  'more'  really  exists;  though 
some  of  them  hold  it  to  exist  in  the  shape  of  a  personal  God  or 
gods  while  others  are  satisfied  to  conceive  it  as  a  stream  of  ideal 
tendency.  .  .  It  is  when  they  treat  of  the  experience  of 
'union'  with  it  that  their  speculative  differences  appear  most 
clearly.  Over  this  point  pantheism  and  theism,  nature  and  second 
birth,  works  and  grace  and  Karma,  immortality  and  reincarnation, 
rationalism  and  mysticism,  carry  on  inveterate  disputes. 

"At  the  end  of  my  lecture  on  Philosophy  I  held  out  the  notion 
that  an  impartial  science  of  religions  might  sift  out  from  the  midst 
of  their  discrepancies  a  common  body  of  doctrine  which  she  might 
also  formulate  on  terms  to  which  physical  science  need  not  ob- 
ject. This,  I  said,  she  might  adopt  as  her  own  reconciling 
hypothesis,  and  recommend  it  for  general  belief. 

"Let  me  then  propose  as  an  hypothesis  that  whatever  it  may  be 
on  its  farther  side,  the  "more"  with  which  in  religious  experience 
we  feel  ourselves  connected  is  on  its  hither  side  the  subconscious 
continuation  of  our  conscious  life. 

"The  conscious  person  is  continuous  with  a  wider  self.     .     . 

"The  further  limits  of  our  being  plunge,  it  seems  to  me,  into 
an  altogether  other  dimension  of  existence  from  the  sensible  and 
merely  "understandable"  world. 


288  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

"Name  it  the  mystical  region,  or  the  super-natural  region.  .  . 
We  belong  to  it,  in  a  more  intimate  sense  than  that  in  which  we 
belong  to  the  visible  world,  for  we  belong  in  the  most  intimate 
sense  wherever  our  ideals  belong.  .  .  The  communion  with 
this  invisible  world  is  a  real  process  with  real  results.     .     .     . 

"This  communion  we  see  in  mysticism. 

"...  Personal  religious  experience  has  its  roots  and 
center  in  mystical  states  of  consciousness" — says  Prof.  James. 

But  what,  after  all,  is  mysticism? 

Returning  to  the  terminology  established  in  the  foregoing 
chapters,  we  may  say  that  mysticism  is  knowledge  by  means 

OF  THE  EXPANDED  CONSCIOUSNESS. 

Until  quite  recently  scientific  psychology  did  not  recognize  the 
reality  of  the  mystical  experience  and  regarded  all  mystical  states 
as  pathological  ones, — unhealthy  conditions  of  the  normal  con- 
sciousness. Even  now,  many  positivist-psychologists  hold  to  this 
opinion,  embracing  in  one  common  classification  real  mystical 
states,  pseudo-mystical  perversions  of  the  usual  consciousness, 
and  purely  psychopathic  states. 

This  of  course  can  be  of  no  assistance  to  a  correct  understanding 
of  the  question.  Before  going  further  let  us  therefore  establish 
certain  criteria  for  the  identification  of  real  mystical  states: 

Prof.  James  enumerates  the  following:  ineffability,  noetic  qual- 
ity, transiency,  passivity.  But  some  of  these  characteristics  be- 
long also  to  simple  emotional  states,  and  he  fails  to  exactly  define 
how  mystical  states  can  be  distinguished  from  emotional  ones  of 
analogous  character. 

Considering  mystical  states  as  "knowledge  by  expanded  con- 
sciousness," it  is  possible  to  give  quite  definite  criteria  for  their 
discernment  and  their  differentiation  from  the  generality  of 
psychic  experiences. 

1.  Mystical  states  give  knowledge  which  nothing  else  can 

GIVE. 

2.  Mystical  states  give  knowledge  of  the  noumenal  world  with 
all  its  signs  and  characteristics. 

3.  The  mystical  states  of  men  of  different  ages  and  different 
peoples  exhibit  an  astonishing  similarity,  sometimes  amounting 
to  complete  identity. 

4.  The  results  of  the  mystical  experience  are  entirely  illogical 
from  our  ordinary  point  of  view.     They  are  superlogical,  i.  е., 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  289 

Tertium  Organum,  which  is  the  key  to  mystical  experience, 
is  applicable  to  them  in  all  its  entirety. 


The  last  named  criterion  is  especially  important — the  illogical- 
ity of  the  data  of  mystical  experience  forced  science  to  repudiate 
them.  Now  we  have  established  that  illogicality  (from  our  stand- 
point) is  the  necessary  condition  of  the  world  beyond,  or  noumenal 
world.  This  does  not  mean  that  everything  that  is  illogical  be- 
longs to  that  world,  but  it  means  absolutely,  that  everything 
which  belongs  to  that  world  is  illogical  from  our  standpoint. 

We  have  established  the  fact  that  it  is  impossible  to  penetrate 
there  with  our  logic,  and  we  have  also  established  the  possibility 
of  penetrating  into  these  heretofore  inaccessible  regions  by  means 
of  the  new  organ  of  thought. 

The  consciousness  of  the  necessity  for  such  an  instrument  of 
thought  undoubtedly  existed  from  far  back.  For  what,  in  sub- 
stance, does  the  formula  Tat  tuam  asi  represent  if  not  the  funda- 
mental AXIOM  OF  TRANSCENDENTAL  LOGIC? 

That  art  Thou  means:  thou  art  both  thou  and  not  thou,  and  cor- 
responds to  the  super-logical  formula,  A  is  both  A  and  not  A. 

If  we  examine  ancient  writings  from  this  standpoint,  then  we  shall 
understand  that  their  authors  were  searching  for  a  new  logic,  and 
were  not  satisfied  with  the  logic  of  the  things  of  the  phenomenal 
world.  The  seeming  illogicality  of  ancient  philosophical  systems, 
which  portrayed  an  ideal  world,  as  it  were,  instead  of  an  existing 
one,  will  then  become  comprehensible,  for  in  these  portrayals  of 
an  ideal  world,  systems  of  higher  logic  often  lie  concealed. 


One  of  such  misunderstood  attempts  to  construe  a  system  of 
higher  logic,  to  give  a  precise  instrument  of  thought,  penetrating 
beyond  the  limits  of  the  visible  world,  is  the  treatise  by  Plotinus 
"On  Intelligible  Beauty." 

Describing  heaven  and  the  gods,  Plotinus  says: 

All  the  gods  are  venerable  and  beautiful,  and  their  beauty  is  immense. 
What  else  however  is  it  but  intellect  through  which  they  are  such?  And 
because  intellect  energizes  in  them  in  so  great  a  degree  as  to  render  them 
visible  (by  its  light)?  For  it  is  not  because  their  bodies  are  beautiful. 
For  these  gods  that  have  bodies  do  not  through  this  derive  their  subsist- 
ence as  gods;  but  these  also  are  gods  through  intellect.  For  they  are  not 
at  one  time  wise,  and  at  another  destitute  of  wisdom;  but  they  are 
always  wise,  in  an  impassive,  stable  and  pure  intellect.  They  likewise 
know  all  things,  not  human  concerns  (precedaneously)  but  their  own, 


290  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

which  are  divine,  and  such  as  intellect  sees.  .  .  For  all  things  there 
are  heaven,  and  there  the  earth  is  heaven,  as  also  are  the  sea,  animals, 
plants,  and  men.  The  gods  likewise  that  it  contains  do  not  think  men 
undeserving  of  their  regard,  nor  anything  else  that  is  there  (because 
everything  there  is  divine).  And  they  occupy  and  pervade  without 
ceasing  the  whole  of  that  (blissful)  region.  For  the  life  which  is  there  is 
unattended  with  labour,  and  truth  (as  Plato  says  in  the  "  Phsedrus"^  is 
their  generator,  and  nutriment,  their  essence  and  nurse.  They  likewise 
see  all  things,  not  those  with  which  generation,  but  those  with  which 
essence  is  present.  And  they  perceive  themselves  in  others.  For  all 
things  there  are  diaphanous;  and  nothing  is  dark  and  resisting,  but 
everything  is  apparent  to  everyone  internally  and  throughout.  For 
light  everywhere  meets  with  light;  since  everything  contains  all  things 
in  itself  and  again  sees  all  things  in  another.  So  that  all  things  are 
everywhere,  and  all  is  all.  Each  thing  likewise  is  everything.  _  And  the 
splendour  there  is  infinite.  For  everything  there  is  great,  since  even 
that  which  is  small  is  great.  The  sun  too  which  is  there  is  all  the  stars; 
and  again  each  star  is  the  sun  and  all  the  stars.  In  each  however,  a 
different  property  predominates,  but  at  the  same  time  all  things  are  visible 
in  each.  Motion  likewise  there  is  pure;  for  the  motion  is  not  con- 
founded by  a  mover  different  from  it.  Permanency  also  suffers  no 
change  of  its  nature,  because  it  is  not  mingled  with  the  unstable.  And 
the  beautiful  there  is  beautiful,  because  it  does  not  subsist  in  beauty  (as 
in  a  subject).  Each  thing  too  is  there  established,  not  as  in  a  foreign 
land,  but  the  seat  of  each  thing  is  that  which  each  thing  is.  .  .  Nor 
is  the  thing  itself  different  from  the  place  in  which  it  subsists.  For  the 
subject  of  it  is  intellect,  and  it  is  itself  intellect  .  .  .  There  each  part 
always  proceeds  from  the  whole,  and  is  at  the  same  time  each  part  and  the 
whole.  For  it  appears  indeed  as  a  part;  but  by  him  whose  sight  is  acute,  it 
will  be  seen  as  a  whole.  .  .  There  is  likewise  no  weariness  of  the  vision 
which  is  there,  nor  any  plenitude  of  perception  which  can  bring  intui- 
tion to  an  end.  For  neither  was  there  any  vacuity,  which  when  filled 
might  cause  the  visive  energy  to  cease;  nor  is  this  one  thing,  but  that 
another,  so  as  to  occasion  a  part  of  one  thing  is  not  to  be  amicable  with 
that  of  another. 

And  the  knowledge  which  is  possible  there  is  insatiable.  .  .  For  by 
seeing  itself  more  abundantly  it  perceives  both  itself  and  the  objects 
of  its  perception  to  be  infinite,  it  follows  its  own  nature  (in  unceasing 
contemplation).  The  life  there  is  wisdom;  a  wisdom  not  obtained  by  a 
reasoning  process,  because  the  whole  of  it  always  was,  and  is  not  in  any 
respect  deficient,  so  as  to  be  in  want  of  investigation.  But  it  is  the  first 
wisdom,  and  is  not  derived  from  another.* 

Closely  akin  to  Plotinus  is  Jacob  Boehme,  who  was  a  common 
shoemaker  in  the  German  town  of  Goerlitz  (end  of  the  XVI 
and  the  beginning  of  the  XVII  century),  and  has  left  a  whole 
series  of  remarkable  books. 

His  first  "illumination"  occurred  in  1600  A.  D.,  when  he  was 
twenty-five  years  old.f 

♦Abridged  quotation  from  "Select  Works  of  Plotinus,"  transl.  by  Thomas  Taylor.  Bonn's 
Library,  pp.  lxxiii  and  lxxiiv. 

tAll  the  ensuing  quotations  are  from  the  books  of  Prof.  William  James,  and  of  Dr.  R.  M.  Bucke. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  291 

Sitting  one  day  in  his  room  his  eyes  fell  upon  a  burnished  pewter  dish, 
which  reflected  the  sunshine  with  such  marvelous  splendor  that  he  fell  into 
an  inward  ecstasy,  and  it  seemed  to  him  as  if  he  could  now  look  into  the 
principles  and  deepest  foundations  of  things.  He  believed  that  it  was 
only  a  fancy,  and  in  order  to  banish  it  from  his  mind  he  went  out  upon 
the  green.  But  here  he  remarked  that  he  gazed  into  the  very  heart  of 
things,  the  very  herbs  and  grass,  and  that  actual  nature  harmonized  with 
what  he  had  inwardly  seen.  He  said  nothing  of  this  to  anyone,  but 
praised  and  thanked  God  in  silence. 

Of  the  first  illumination  Boehme's  biographer  says:  "He 
learned  to  know  the  innermost  foundation  of  nature,  and  acquired 
the  capacity  to  see  henceforth  with  the  eyes  of  the  soul  into  the 
heart  of  all  things,  a  faculty  which  remained  with  him  even  in  his 
normal  condition." 

About  the  year  1600,  in  the  twenty-fifth  year  of  his  age,  he  was  again 
surrounded  by  the  divine  light  and  replenished  with  the  heavenly  knowl- 
edge; insomuch  as  going  abroad  in  the  fields  to  a  green  before  Neys  Gate, 
at  Goerlitz,  he  there  sat  down  and,  viewing  the  herbs  and  grass  of  the 
field  in  his  inward  light,  he  saw  into  their  essences,  use  and  properties, 
which  were  discovered  to  him  by  their  lineaments,  figures  and  signa- 
tures. In  like  manner  he  beheld  the  whole  creation,  and  from  that 
foundation  of  revelation  he  afterwards  wrote  his  book,  "  De  Signature 
Rerum."  In  the  unfolding  of  those  mysteries  before  his  understanding 
he  had  a  great  measure  of  joy,  yet  returned  home  and  took  care  of  his 
family  and  lived  in  great  peace  and  silence,  scarce  intimating  to  any 
these  wonderful  things  that  had  befallen  him  and  in  the  year  1610,  being 
again  taken  into  this  light,  lest  the  mysteries  revealed  to  him  should  pass 
through  him  as  a  stream,  and  rather  for  a  memorial  than  intending  any 
publication,  he  wrote  his  first  book,  called  "Aurora,  or  the  Morning 
Redness." 

The  first  illumination,  in  1600,  was  not  complete.  Ten  years 
later  (1610)  he  had  another  remarkable  inward  experience.  What 
he  had  previously  seen  only  chaotically,  fragmentarily,  and  in 
isolated  glimpses,  he  now  beheld  as  a  coherent  whole  and  in  more 
definite  outlines. 

When  his  third  illumination  took  place,  that  which  in  former  visions 
had  appeared  to  him  chaotic  and  multifarious  was  now  recognized  by 
by  him  as  a  unity,  like  a  harp  of  many  strings,  of  which  each  string  is  a 
separate  instrument,  while  the  whole  is  only  one  harp* 

He  now  recognized  the  divine  order  of  nature,  and  how  from  the  trunk 
of  the  tree  of  life  spring  different  branches,  bearing  manifold  leaves  and 
flowers  and  fruits,  and  he  became  impressed  with  the  necessity  of  writing 
down  what  he  saw  and  preserved  the  record. 

He  himself  speaks  of  this  final  and  complete  illumination  as 
follows : 

♦See  quotation  from  Van  Manen's  book,  Chap.  xi.     p.  125 


292  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

The  gate  was  opened  to  me  that  in  one  quarter  of  an  hour  I  saw  and 
knew  more  than  if  I  had  been  many  years  at  a  university,  at  which  I  ex- 
ceedingly admired  and  thereupon  turned  my  praise  to  God  for  it.  For 
I  saw  and  knew  the  being  of  all  beings,  the  byss  and  abyss  and  the  eternal 
generation  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  the  descent  and  original  of  the  world  and 
of  all  creatures  through  divine  wisdom.  I  knew  and  saw  in  myself  all 
the  three  worlds,  namely,  (1)  the  divine  (angelical  and  paradisical) 
(2)  and  the  dark  (the  original  of  the  nature  to  the  fire)  and  (3)  then  the 
external  and  visible  world  (being  a  procreation  or  external  birth  from 
both  the  internal  and  spiritual  worlds) .  And  I  saw  and  knew  the  whole 
working  essence  in  the  evil  and  the  good  and  the  original  and  the  exist- 
ence of  each  of  them;  and  likewise  how  the  fruitful — bearing — womb  of 
eternity  brought  forth.  So  that  I  did  not  only  greatly  wonder  at  it  but 
did  also  exceedingly  rejoice. 

Describing  "illuminations"  Boehme  writes,  in  one  of  his  books: 

Suddenly  .  .  .  my  spirit  did  break  through  .  .  .  even  into  the 
innermost  birth  of  Geniture  of  the  Deity,  and  there  I  was  embraced  with 
love,  as  a  bridegroom  embraces  his  dearly  beloved  bride.  But  the  great- 
ness of  the  triumphing  that  was  in  the  spirit  I  cannot  express  either  in 
speaking  or  writing;  neither  can  it  be  compared  to  anything,  but  that 
wherein  the  life  is  generated  in  the  midst  of  death,  and  it  is  like  the 
resurrection  from  the  dead.  In  this  light  my  spirit  suddenly  saw  through 
all,  and  in  and  by  all  creatures,  even  in  herbs  and  grass,  it  knew  God,  who 
he  is,  and  how  he  is,  and  what  his  work  is;  and  suddenly  in  that  light  my 
will  was  set  on,  by  a  mighty  impulse,  to  describe  the  being  of  God.  But 
because  I  could  not  presently  apprehend  the  deepest  births  of  God  in 
their  being  and  comprehend  them  in  my  reason,  there  passed  almost 
twelve  years  before  the  exact  understanding  thereof  was  given  me.  And 
it  was  with  me  as  with  a  young  tree  which  is  planted  on  the  ground,  and 
at  first  is  young  and  tender,  and  flourishing  to  the  eye,  especially  if  it 
comes  on  lustily  in  its  growing.  But  it  does  not  bear  fruit  presently; 
and,  though  it  blossoms,  they  fall  off;  also  many  a  cold  wind,  frost  and 
snow,  puff  upon  it,  before  it  comes  to  any  growth  and  bearing  of  fruit. 

Boehme's  books  are  full  of  wonderment  before  these  mysteries 
with  which  he  was  confronted, 

I  was  as  simple  concerning  the  hidden  mysteries  as  the  meanest  of  all; 
but  my  virgin  of  the  wonders  of  God  taught  me,  so  that  I  must  write  of 
his  wonders;  though  indeed  my  purpose  is  to  write  this  for  a  memoran- 
dum for  myself.    .    .    . 

Not  I,  the  I  that  I  am,  know  these  things:  but  God  knows  them  in  me. 

If  you  will  behold  your  own  self  and  the  outer  world,  and  what  is 
taking  place  thereon,  you  will  find  that  you,  with  regard  to  your  external 
being,  are  that  external  world. 

The  "Dialogues"  between  Disciple  and  Master  are  remarkable 
(Disciple  and  Master  should  be  understood  to  refer  to  the  lower 
and  the  higher  consciousness  of  man). 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  293 

The  Disciple  said  to  his  Master : 

How  may  I  come  to  the  supersensual  life,  that  I  may  see  God  and  hear 
him  speak? 

His  Master  said : 

When  thou  canst  throw  thyself  but  for  a  moment  into  that  where  no 
creature  dwelleth,  then  thou  hearest  what  God  speaketh. 

Disciple — Is  that  near  at  hand  or  far  off? 

Master — It  is  in  thee.  And  if  thou  canst  for  a  while  but  cease  from  all 
thy  thinking  and  willing,  then  thou  shalt  hear  the  unspeakable  words  of 
God. 

Disciple — How  can  I  hear  him  speak,  when  I  stand  still  from  thinking 
and  willing? 

Master — When  thou  standest  still  from  the  thinking  of  self,  and  the 
willing  of  self;  "When  both  thy  intellect  and  will  are  quiet,  and  passive 
to  the  impressions  of  the  Eternal  Word  and  Spirit;  And  when  thy  soul 
is  winged  up,  and  above  that  which  is  temporal,  the  outward  senses,  and 
the  imagination  being  locked  up  by  holy  abstraction,"  then  the  Eternal 
hearing,  seeing,  and  speaking,  will  be  revealed  in  thee;  and  so  God 
"heareth  and  seeth  through  thee,"  being  now  the  organ  of  his  spirit; 
and  so  God  speaketh  in  thee,  and  whispereth  to  thy  spirit,  and  thy  spirit 
heareth  his  voice.  Blessed  art  thou  therefore  if  that  thou  canst  stand  still 
from  self-thinking  and  self-willing,  and  canst  stop  the  wheel  of  imagina- 
tion and  senses;  forasmuch  as  hereby  thou  may  est  arrive  at  length  to  see 
the  great  salvation  of  God,  being  made  capable  of  all  manner  of  Divine 
sensations  and  heavenly  communications.  Since  it  is  naught  indeed  but 
thine  own  hearing  and  willing  that  do  wonder  thee,  so  that  thou  dost 
not  see  and  hear  God. 

Disciple — Loving  Master,  I  can  no  more  endure  anything  should  divert 
me,  how  shall  I  find  the  nearest  way  to  him? 

Master — Where  the  way  is  hardest  there  walk  thou,  and  take  up  what 
the  world  rejecteth;  and  what  the  world  doth,  that  do  not  thou.  Walk 
contrary  to  the  world  in  all  things.  And  then  thou  comest  the  nearest 
way  to  him. 

Disciple —  ...  О  how  may  I  arrive  at  the  unity  of  will,  and  how 
come  into  the  unity  of  vision? 

Master —  .  .  .  Mark  now  what  I  say:  The  Right  Eye  looketh  in 
thee  into  Eternity.  The  Left  Eye  looketh  backward  in  thee  into  time.  If 
now  thou  sufferest  thyself  to  be  always  looking  into  nature,  and  the 
things  of  time,  it  will  be  impossible  for  thee  ever  to  arrive  at  the  unity, 
which  thou  wishest  for.  Remember  this;  and  be  upon  thy  watch.  Give 
not  thy  mind  leave  to  enter  in,  nor  to  fill  itself  with,  that  which  is  without 
thee;  neither  look  thou  backward  upon  thyself  .  .  .  Let  not  thy 
Left  Eye  deceive  thee,  by  making  continually  one  representation  after 
another,  and  stirring  up  thereby  an  earnest  longing  in  the  self-propriety; 
but  let  thy  Right  Eye  command  back  this  Left  .  .  .  And  only  bring- 
ing the  Eye  of  Time  into  the  Eye  of  Eternity  .  .  .  and  descending 
through  the  Light  of  God  into  the  Light  of  Nature  .  .  .  shalt  thou 
arrive  at  the  Unity  of  Vision  or  Uniformity  of  Will. 


294  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

In  another  dialogue  the  Disciple  and  the  Master  converse  about 
heaven  and  hell. 

The  Disciple  asked  his  Master: 

Whither  go  the  souls  when  they  leave  these  mortal  bodies? 

His  Master  answered: 

The  soul  needeth  no  going  forth  anywhere. 

Disciple — Does  it  not  enter  into  heaven  or  hell? 

Master — No,  there  is  no  such  kind  of  entering.  .  .  The  soul  hath 
heaven  and  hell  in  itself  .  .  .  and  whether  of  the  two  states — either 
heaven  or  hell — shall  be  manifested  in  the  soul,  in  that  it  standeth. 

The  quotations  given  here  are  sufficient  to  indicate  the  char- 
acter of  the  writings  of  an  unlearned  shoemaker  from  a  little 
provincial  town  in  Germany  of  the  XVI — XVII  centuries.  Boehme 
is  remarkable  for  the  bright  intellectuality  of  his  comprehensions, 
although  there  is  in  them  a  strong  moral  element  also. 

In  the  book  above  mentioned  ("The  Varieties  of  Religious 
Experience")  Prof.  James  dwells  with  great  attention  on  Christian 
Mysticism,  which  afforded  him  much  material  for  establishing  the 
fact  of  the  cognitive  aspect  of  mysticism. 

I  borrow  from  him  the  following  description  of  the  mystical 
experiences  of  certain  Christian  saints. 

St.  Ignatius  confessed  one  day  to  Father  Laynez  that  a  single  hour 
of  meditation  at  Manfesa  had  taught  him  more  truths  about  heavenly 
things  than  all  the  teachings  of  all  the  doctors  put  together  could  have 
taught  him.  .  .  One  day  in  orison,  on  the  steps  of  the  choir  of  the 
Dominican  Church,  he  saw  in  a  distinct  manner  the  plan  of  divine 
wisdom  in  the  creation  of  the  world.  On  another  oecasion,  during  a 
procession,  his  spirit  was  ravished  on  God,  and  it  was  given  him  to  con- 
template, in  a  form  and  images  fitted  to  the  weak  understanding  of  a 
dweller  on  earth,  the  deep  mystery  of  the  holy  Trinity.  This  last  vision 
flooded  his  heart  with  such  sweetness,  that  mere  memory  of  it  in  after 
times  made  him  shed  abundant  tears. 

"One  day,  being  in  orison,"  Saint  Teresa  writes,  "it  was  granted  me  to 
perceive  in  one  instant  how  all  things  are  seen  and  contained  in  God. 
I  did  not  perceive  them  in  their  proper  form,  and  nevertheless  the  view 
I  had  of  them  was  of  a  sovereign  clearness  and  has  remained  vividly  im- 
pressed upon  my  soul.  It  is  one  of  the  most  signal  of  all  the  graces 
which  the  Lord  has  granted  me.  .  .  The  view  was  so  subtle  and  deli- 
cate that  the  understanding  cannot  grasp  it." 

She  goes  on  to  tell,  Prof.  James  writes,  how  it  was  as  if  the  Deity  was 
an  enormous  and  sovereignly  limped  diamond,  in  which  all  our  actions 
were  contained  in  such  a  way  that  their  full  sinfulness  appeared  evident 
as  never  before. 

"Our  Lord  made  me  comprehend,"  she  writes,  "in  what  way  it  is  that 
one  God  can  be  in  three  Persons.    He  made  me  see  it  so  clearly  that  I 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  296 

remained  as  extremely  surprised  as  I  was  comforted  .  .  .  and  now, 
when  I  think  of  the  holy  Trinity,  or  hear  it  spoken  of,  I  understand  how 
the  three  adorable  Persons  form  only  one  God  and  I  experienced  an  un- 
speakable happiness." 

Christian  mysticism,  as  Prof.  James  shows,  is  very  near  to  the 
Veddnta  and  the  Upanishads.  That  fountain-head  of  Christian 
mysticism,  Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  tells  about  the  absolute 
truth  in  negative  formulcB  only. 

"The  cause  of  all  things  is  neither  soul  or  intellect;  nor  has  it  imagina- 
tion, opinion,  or  reason,  or  intelligence;  nor  is  it  reason  or  intelligence; 
nor  is  it  spoken  or  thought.  It  is  neither  number,  nor  order,  nor  magni- 
tude, nor  littleness,  nor  equality,  nor  inequality,  nor  similarity,  nor  dis- 
similarity. It  neither  stands,  nor  moves,  nor  rests.  .  .  It  is  neither 
essence,  nor  eternity,  nor  time.  Even  intellectual  contact  does  not  belong 
to  it.  It  is  neither  science  nor  truth.  It  is  not  even  royalty  or  wisdom;  not 
one;  not  unity;  not  divinity  or  goodness,  nor  even  spirit  as  we  know  it." 

The  writings  of  the  mystics  of  the  Greek  Orthodox  Church  are 
collected  in  the  books  "The  Love  of  the  Good,"  comprising  five 
large  and  formidable  volumes.  I  select  several  examples  of  pro- 
found and  fine  mysticism  from  the  book,  "  Superconsciousness  and 
the  Paths  to  its  Attainment,"  by  M.  V.  Lodijensky  (In  Russian) 
who  studied  these  books  and  found  therein  remarkable  examples 
of  philosophical  thought. 

Imagine  a  circle,  says  Avva  Dorotheus  (VII  century)  and  in  the  middle 
of  it  a  center;  and  from  this  center  forthgoing  radii-rays.  The  farther 
these  radii  go  from  the  center,  the  more  divergent  and  remote  from 
one  another  they  become;  conversely,  the  nearer  they  approach  to  the 
center,  the  more  they  come  together  among  themselves.  Now  suppose 
that  this  circle  is  the  world:  the  very  middle  of  it,  God;  and  the  straight 
line  (radii)  going  from  the  center  to  the  circumference,  or  from  the  cir- 
cumference to  the  center,  are  the  paths  of  life  of  men.  And  in  this  case 
also,  to  the  extent  that  the  saints  approach  the  middle  of  the  circle, 
desiring  to  approach  God,  do  they,  by  so  doing,  come  nearer  to  God  and 
to  one  another.  .  .  Reason  similarly  with  regard  to  their  withdraw- 
ing— when  they  withdraw  from  God.  .  .  they  withdraw  also  from 
one  another,  and  by  so  much  as  they  withdraw  from  one  another  do  they 
withdraw  from  God.  Such  is  the  attribute  of  love :  to  the  extent  that  we 
are  distant  from  God  and  do  not  love  Him,  each  of  us  is  far  from  his 
neighbor  also.  If  we  love  God,  then  to  the  extent  that  we  approach  to 
Him  through  love  of  Him,  do  we  unite  in  love  with  our  neighbors;  and 
the  closer  our  union  with  them,  the  closer  is  our  union  with  God  also.* 

(Superconsciousness,  p.  266) 

*  The  author  of  "Superconsciousness,"  M.  V.  Lodijensky,  told  me  that  in  the  summer  of  1910  he 
was  in  "Yasnaya  Poliana,"  the  residence  of  L.  Tolstoy,  and  he  conversed  with  him  about  the  mystioe 
and  "The  Love  of  the  Good."  Tolstoy  was  at  first  very  skeptical  about  them,  but  when  Mr.  Lodijensky 
read  to  him  the  quotation,  given  here,  about  the  circle,  Tolstoy  became  very  enthusiastic,  and  ran  into 
another  room  and  got  a  letter  in  which  a  triangle  was  drawn.  It  appeared  that  he  had  independently 
almost  grasped  the  thought  of  Avva  Dorotheus,  and  had  written  to  someone  that  God  was  the  apex  of 
a  triangle:  men  the  points  within  the  angles;  approaching  to  one  another  they  approach  to  God,  approach- 
ing God,  they  do  the  same  toward  one  another.  Several  days  afterward  Tolstoy  rode  over  to  Mr. 
Lodijensky's,  near  Tula,  and  read  different  parts  of  "The  Love  of  the  Good,"  much  regretting  that  he 
had  not  known  the  books  before. — P.  D.  Ouspensky. 


296  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

Hear  now,  says  St.  Isaac  of  Syria  (VI  century),  how  man  becomes 
refined,  acquires  spirituality,  and  becomes  like  the  invisible  forces.  .  . 
When  the  vision  soars  above  things  earthly,  and  above  all  troubles  over 
earthly  doings,  and  begins  to  experience  revelations  concerning  that 
which  is  within,  hidden  from  sight,  and  when  it  will  turn  its  gaze  upward, 
and  experience  faith  in  the  guidance  of  future  ages,  and  the  ardent  desire 
for  promised  things,  when  it  will  search  for  hidden  mysteries,  then  faith 
itself  consumes  this  knowledge  and  so  transforms  and  regenerates  it  that 
it  becomes  entirely  spiritual.  Then  may  the  vision  soar  on  pinions  into 
regions  incorporeal,  may  touch  the  depths  of  an  inaccessible  sea,  par- 
ticipating in  the  mind  Divine,  and  the  miraculous  acts  of  guidance  in  the 
hearts  of  thinking  and  feeling  beings,  discovering  spiritual  mysteries 
which  become  then  comprehensible  by  the  refined  and  simple  mind. 
Then  the  inner  senses  are  awakened  to  spirituality  after  the  manner  that 
they  will  be  in  the  life  immortal  and  incorruptible,  for  even  here  this 
redemption  of  the  mind  is  a  true  symbol  of  the  general  redemption. 

(Super consciousness,  p.  370). 

When  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  says  Maxim  Kapsokalivit,  descends 
on  anyone,  there  is  shown  to  him  nothing  of  the  sensuous  world,  but 
that  which  he  never  saw  or  never  imagined.  Then  the  understanding  of 
such  a  man  receives  from  the  Holy  Spirit  the  highest  and  hidden  mys- 
teries which  according  to  the  divine  Paul,  neither  the  human  eye  can 
understand  nor  the  human  reason  comprehend  unaided.  (I  Corinthians 
ii,  9).  And  that  thou  mayest  understand  how  our  reason  sees  them, 
try  to  apprehend  that  which  I  shall  say  to  thee.  Wax,  when  it  is  placed 
far  from  fire,  is  solid,  and  it  is  possible  to  take  it  and  hold  it,  but  as  soon 
as  it  is  thrown  in  fire  it  immediately  melts,  takes  fire,  burns,  blazes  and 
ends  thus  in  the  midst  of  flames.  So  also  is  human  reason  when  it  is 
alone  by  itself,  ununited  with  God;  then  it  comprehends  in  the  usual  way 
and  according  to  its  power  all  things  surrounding  it;  but  as  it  approaches 
the  fire  of  Divinity  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  then  is  it  entirely  enveloped 
by  that  Divine  fire,  and  immersed  in  Divine  meditation,  and  then  in  that 
fire  of  Divinity  it  is  impossible  for  it  to  think  about  its  own  affairs  and 
about  that  which  it  desires. 

(Super consciousness,  p.  370). 

St.  Basil  the  Great  says  about  the  revelation  of  God:  Absolutely  un- 
utterable and  indescribable  are  the  lightning-like  splendors  of  Divine 
beauty;  neither  can  speech  express  nor  hearing  apprehend.  Shall  we 
name  the  brilliance  of  the  morning  star,  the  brightness  of  the  moon,  the 
radiance  of  the  sun — the  glory  of  all  these  is  unworthy  of  being  compared 
with  the  true  light,  standing  farther  from  it  than  does  the  gloomiest  night 
and  the  most  terrible  darkness  from  midday  brightness.  This  beauty, 
invisible  to  bodily  eyes,  comprehensible  to  soul  and  mind  only,  if  it 
illumines  some  of  the  saints  leaves  in  them  an  unbearable  wound  through 
their  desire  that  this  vision  of  Divine  beauty  should  extend  over  an 
eternity  of  life;  disturbed  by  this  earthly  life,  they  loathe  it  as  though  it 
were  a  prison. 

(Super consciousness,  p.  372). 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  297 

St.  Theognis  says :  A  strange  word  will  I  say  to  thee.  There  is  some 
hidden  mystery  which  proceeds  between  God  and  the  soul.  This  is  ex- 
perienced by  those  who  achieve  the  highest  heights  of  perfect  purity 
of  love  and  faith,  when  man,  changing  completely  unites  with  God,  as 
His  own,  through  ceaseless  prayer  and  contemplation. 

(Super consciousness,  p.  381). 

Certain  parts  of  the  writings  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (second 
century)  are  remarkably  interesting. 

It  appears  to  us  that  painting  appears  to  take  in  the  whole  field  of 
view  in  the  scenes  represented.  But  it  gives  a  false  description  of  the 
view,  according  to  the  rules  of  the  art,  employing  the  signs  that  result 
from  the  incidents  of  the  lines  of  vision. — By  this  means,  the  higher  and 
the  lower  points  in  the  view,  and  those  between,  are  preserved;  and  some 
objects  seem  to  appear  in  the  foreground,  and  others  in  the  background, 
and  others  to  appear  in  some  other  way,  on  the  smooth  and  level  surface. 
So  also  philosophers  copy  the  truth,  after  the  manner  of  painting.* 

Clement  of  Alexandria  here  reveals  one  very  important  aspect 
of  truth,  namely,  its  inexpressibility  in  words  and  the  entire  con- 
ditionally of  all  philosophical  systems  and  formulations.  Dia- 
lectically  truth  is  represented  only  in  perspective — i.  е.,  in  an 
inevitably  deformed  shape — such  is  his  idea. 

What  time  and  labor  would  be  saved,  and  from  what  enormous 
and  unnecessary  suffering  would  humanity  save  itself,  could  it 
but  understand  this  one  simple  thing:  that  truth  cannot  be  expressed 
in  our  language.  Then  would  men  cease  to  think  that  they 
possessed  truth,  would  cease  to  force  others  to  accept  their  truth  at 
any  cost,  would  see  that  others  may  approach  truth  from  another 
direction,  exactly  as  they  themselves  approach  it,  by  a  way  of 
their  own.  How  many  arguments,  how  many  religious  struggles, 
how  much  of  violence  toward  the  thoughts  of  others  would  be 
rendered  unnecessary  and  impossible  if  men  would  only  under- 
stand that  nobody  possesses  truth,  but  all  are  seeking  for  it,  each 
in  his  own  way. 

The  ideas  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  about  God  are  highly  inter- 
esting, and  closely  approximate  to  those  of  the  Veddnta,  and  par- 
ticularly to  the  ideas  of  the  Chinese  philosophers. 

The  discourse  respecting  God  is  the  most  difficult  to  handle.  For 
since  the  first  principle  of  everything  is  difficult  to  find  out,  the  abso- 
lutely first  and  the  oldest  principle,  which  is  the  cause  of  all  other  things 
being  and  having  been,  is  difficult  to  exhibit.  For  how  can  that  be 
expressed  which  is  neither  genus,  nor  difference,  nor  species,  nor  indi- 
vidual, nor  number;  nay  more,  is  neither  an  event,  nor  that  to  which 

*  "The  Ante-Nicene  Fathers."  Buffalo,  The  Christian  Literature  Pub.  Co.,  1885.  Vol.  II, 
pp.  463,  464. 


298  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

an  event  happens?  No  one  can  rightly  express  this  wholly.  For  on  ac- 
count of  his  greatness  he  is  ranked  as  the  All  and  is  the  Father  of  the 
universe.  Nor  are  any  parts  to  be  predicted  of  them.  For  the  one  is 
indivisible,  wherefore  also  it  is  infinite,  not  considered  with  reference  to 
its  being  without  dimensions,  and  not  having  a  limit.  And  therefore  it 
is  without  form  and  name.  And  if  we  name  it,  we  do  not  do  so  properly, 
terming  it  either  the  one,  or  the  good,  or  mind,  or  Absolute  Being,  or 
Father,  or  God,  or  Creator,  or  Lord.  We  speak  not  as  supplying  His 
name;  but  for  want,  we  use  good  names,  in  order  that  the  mind  may 
have  these  as  points  of  support,  so  as  not  to  err  in  other  respects.* 

Among  Chinese  mystical  philosophers  our  attention  is  ar- 
rested by  Lao-Tzu  (VI  cent.  В.  C),  and  Chuang-Tzu  (IV  cent. 
В.  C.)  by  the  cleanliness  of  thought  and  the  unusual  simplicity, 
with  which  they  express  the  most  profound  doctrines  of  idealism. 

The  Sayings  of  Lao-Tzu 

The  Tao  which  can  be  expressed  in  words  is  not  the  eternal  Tao;  the 
name  which  can  be  uttered  is  not  its  eternal  name.f 

Tao  eludes  the  sense  of  sight,  and  is  therefore  called  colourless.  It 
eludes  the  sense  of  hearing,  and  is  therefore  called  soundless.  It  eludes 
the  sense  of  touch,  and  is  therefore  called  incorporeal.  These  three  qual- 
ities cannot  be  apprehended,  and  hence  they  may  be  blended  into  unity. 

Ceaseless  in  action,  it  cannot  be  named,  but  returns  again  to  nothing- 
ness. We  may  call  it  the  form  of  the  formless,  the  image  of  the  image- 
less,  the  fleeting  and  the  indeterminable. 

There  is  something  chaotic,  yet  complete,  which  existed  before  heaven 
and  Earth.  ,  Oh,  how  still  it  is,  and  formless,  standing  alone  without 
changing,  reaching  everywhere,  without  suffering  harm! 

Its  name  I  know  not.  To  designate  it  I  call  it  Tao.  Endeavoring  to 
describe  it,  I  call  it  Great. 

Being  Great,  it  passes  on;  passing  on,  it  becomes  remote;  having  be- 
come remote  it  returns. 

The  law  of  Tao  is  its  own  spontaneity. 

Tao  in  its  unchanging  aspect  has  no  name. 

The  mightiest  manifestations  of  active  force  flow  from  Tao. 

Tao  as  it  exists  in  the  world  is  like  great  rivers  and  seas  which  receive 
the  streams  from  the  valleys. 

All-prevading  is  the  Great  Tao.  It  can  be  at  once  on  the  right  hand 
and  on  the  left. 

Tao  is  a  great  square  with  no  angles,  a  great  sound  which  cannot  be 
heard,  a  great  image  with  no  form. 

Tao  produced  Unity;  Unity  produced  Duality;  Duality  produced 
Trinity;  and  Trinity  produced  all  existing  objects. 

He  who  acts  in  accordance  with  Tao,  becomes  one  with  Tao. 

All  the  world  says  that  my  Tao  is  great,  but  unlike  other  teachings. 
It  is  just  because  it  is  great  that  it  appears  unlike  other  teachings.  If 
it  had  this  likeness,  long  ago  would  its  smallness  have  been  known. 

*  Ibid.     p.  493. 

t  Abridged  quotation  from  "the  sayings  of  Lao  Tzu."     Wisdom  of  the  East  Series. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  2" 

The  sage  attends  to  the  inner  and  not  to  the  outer;  he  puts  away  the 

«ЧЙ^о^ЙЕ^^  and  conveys  instructions 

^о'Леге  that  can  make  muddy  water  dear?    But  «  allowed  to 

°'тГь  ctXdinacth"!eand  yet  it  leaves  nothing  undone 

The  nursuTt  of  book-lea  ning  brings  about  daily  increase  (l.  e,  the 
ine  pursim  01  uuu  „_.-.:„,  0f  Tao  brings  about  dady  loss 

ГеТье1о"8Т^  »*>«  V  ^T'  Г\£Х 

arrive  at ■  Sonfpracttee  inaction,  and  there  is  nothing  which  cannot 

^Practice  inaction,  occupy  yourself  with  doing  nothing. 

Leave  all  things  to  take  their  natural  course,  and  do  not  interfere. 

All  things  in  Nature  work  silently.  ,     .  , 

Among  mankind,  the  recognition  of  beauty  as  such ^imphes  the  idea 
nfmmness  and  the  recognition  of  good  implies  the  idea  of  evil. 

Cast  off  your  holiness,  rid  yourself  of  sagacity,  and  the  people  will 

^oL^ktw  dodnot  speak;  those  who  speak  do  not  know. 

К^Ж^ув;  he'who  grasps,  loses.    Therefore  the  sage  does 
nofact,  and  so  he  does  not  destroy;  he  does  not  grasp,  and  so  he  does 

n0Thesoft  overcomes  the  hard;  the  weak  overcomes  the  strong  There 
is  no  one  in  the  world  but  knows  this  truth,  and  no  one  who  can  put  it 
into  practice. 

A  Meditation  of  Chuang-Tzu 
You  cannot  speak  of  ocean  to  a  well-frog -the  creature  of  a  narrower 
sphere     You  cannot  speak  of  ice  to  a  summer  insect,-the  creature  of  a 
season.    You  cannot  speak  of  Tao  to  a  pedagogue,  his  scope  is  too  re- 

StButdnow  that  you  have  emerged  from  your  ^^^^^ 
seen  the  great  ocean,  you  know  your  own  insignificance,  and  1  can 

^^JZ^^&^  isendless.    Conditions  are  not  invari- 

*%J^^3^  is  not  objective;  there  is  nothing  which  is  not 
subjective.    Bu   it  is  impossible  to  start  from  the  objective     Only  from 
sub  ective  knowledge  is  it  possible  to  proceed  to  objective  knowledge 
When  subjective  and  objective  are  both  without  their  correlates,  that 

18  Ta6o  haTiLtaws  2d  its  evidences.    It  is  devoid  both  of  action  and  of 
form. 

It  may  be  obtained  but  cannot  be  seen. 

Spiritual  beings  draw  their  spirituality  from  lao. 

To  Tao  no  point  in  time  is  long  ago. 


300  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

Tao  cannot  be  existent.  If  it  were  existent,  it  could  not  be  non- 
existent. The  very  name  of  Tao  is  only  adapted  for  convenience'  sake. 
Predestination  and  chance  are  limited  to  material  existences. — How  can 
they  bear  upon  the  infinite? 

Tao  is  something  beyond  material  existences.  It  cannot  be  conveyed 
either  by  words  or  by  silence.  In  that  state  which  is  neither  speech  nor 
silence,  its  transcendal  nature  may  be  apprehended.* 


In  contemporary  Theosophical  literature,  two  little  books  stand 
out:  "The  Voice  of  the  Silence"  by  H.  P.  Blavatsky,  and  "Light 
on  the  Path"  by  Mabel  Collins.  In  both  of  them  there  is  much  of 
real  mystical  sentiment. 

The  Voice  of  the  Silence 

He  who  would  hear  the  voice  of  the  silence,  the  soundless  sound,  and 
comprehend  it,  he  has  to  learn  the  nature  of  the  perfect  inward  concen- 
tration of  the  mind,  accompanied  by  complete  abstraction  from  every- 
thing pertaining  to  the  external  Universe,  or  the  world  of  senses. 

Having  become  indifferent  to  objects  of  perception,  the  pupil  must 
seek  out  the  Rajah  of  the  senses,  the  Thought-Producer,  he  who  awakes 
illusions. 

The  mind  is  the  great  slayer  of  the  real. 

Let  the  Disciple  slay  the  Slayer. 

For— 

When  to  himself  his  form  appears  unreal,  as  do  on  waking  all  the 
forms  he  sees  in  dreams; 

When  he  ceased  to  hear  the  many,  he  may  discern  the  ONE — the 
inner  sound  which  kills  the  outer. 

Then  only,  not  till  then,  shall  he  forsake  the  region  of  ASAT,  the 
false,  to  come  into  the  realm  of  SAT,  the  true. 

Before  the  soul  can  see,  the  harmony  within  must  be  attained,  and 
fleshly  eyes  be  rendered  blind  to  illusion. 

Before  the  soul  can  hear,  the  image  (man)  has  to  become  as  deaf  to 
warnings  as  to  whispers,  to  cries  of  bellowing  elephants  as  to  the  silvery 
buzzing  of  the  golden  firefly. 

And  then  to  the  inner  ear  will  speak — 

THE  VOICE  OF  THE  SILENCE 

And  say: 

— If  thy  Soul  smiles  while  bathing  in  the  sunlight  of  thy  life;  if  thy 
soul  sings  within  her  chrysalis  of  flesh  and  matter;  if  thy  soul  weeps 
inside  her  castle  of  illusion;  if  thy  soul  struggles  to  break  the  silver 
thread  that  binds  her  to  the  MASTER  (г.  е.,  the  higher  self  of  man) — 
know,  О  Disciple,  thy  soul  is  of  the  earth. 

Give  up  thy  life,  if  thou  wouldst  live. 


•"Musings  of  a  Chinese  Mystic."     Wisdom  of  the  East  Series. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  301 

Learn  to  discern  the  real  from  the  false,  the  ever-fleeting  from  the  ever- 
lasting. Learn  above  all  to  separate  head-learning  from  soul-wisdom,  the 
"Eye"  from  the  "Heart"  doctrine. 

"Light  on  the  Path,"  like  "The  Voice  of  the  Silence"  is  full  of 
symbols,  hints  and  hidden  meanings.  This  is  a  little  book  which 
makes  demands  upon  the  reader.  Its  meaning  is  elusive,  and  it  re- 
quires to  be  read  in  a  fitting  state  of  spirit.  "Light  on  the  Path" 
prepares  the  "disciple"  to  meet  the  "Master,"  i.  е.,  the  ordinary 
consciousness  for  communion  with  the  higher  consciousness. 
According  to  the  author  of  "Light  on  the  Path,"  the  term  "THE 
MASTERS"  is  a  symbolical  expression  for  the  "Divine  Life."* 

Light  on  the  Path 
Before  the  eyes  can  see  they  must  be  incapable  of  tears.  Before  the  ear 
can  hear  it  must  have  lost  its  sensitiveness.  Before  the  voice  can  speak 
in  the  presence  of  the  Masters  it  must  have  lost  the  power  to  wound. 
Before  the  soul  can  stand  in  the  presence  of  the  Masters  its  feet  must  be 
washed  in  the  blood  of  the  heart. 

Kill  out  all  sense  of  separateness. 

Desire  only  that  which  is  within  you. 

Desire  only  that  which  is  beyond  you. 

Desire  only  that  which  is  unattainable. 

For  within  you  is  the  light  of  the  world.  .  .  If  you  are  unable  to 
perceive  it  within  you,  it  is  useless  to  look  for  it  elsewhere.  .  .  it  is 
unattainable,  because  it  forever  recedes.  You  will  enter  the  light,  but  you 
will  never  touch  the  Flame.     .     . 

Seek  out  the  way. 

Look  for  the  flower  to  bloom  in  the  silence  that  follows  the  storm: 
not  till  then.     .     . 

And  on  the  deep  silence  the  mysterious  event  will  occur  which  will 
prove  that  the  way  has  been  found.  Call  it  by  what  name  you  will,  it 
speaks  in  a  voice  that  speaks  where  there  is  none  to  speak — it  is  a 
messenger  that  comes,  a  messenger  without  form  or  substance;  or  it  is 
the  flower  of  the  soul  that  has  opened.  It  cannot  be  described  by  any 
metaphor. 

To  hear  the  voice  of  the  silence  is  to  understand  that  from  within 
comes  the  only  true  guidance.  .  .  For  when  the  disciple  is  ready, 
the  Master  is  ready  also. 

Hold  fast  to  that  which  is  neither  substance  or  existence. 

Listen  only  to  the  voice  which  is  soundless. 

Look  only  on  that  which  is  invisible. 

Prof.  James  calls  attention  in  his  book  to  the  unusually  vivid 
emotionality  of  mystic  experiences,  and  to  the  quite  unusual  sen- 
sations felt  by  mystics. 

*  "Light  on  the  Path"  p.  92.     London,  Theosophical  Pub.  Co. 


302  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

The  deliciousness  of  some  of  these  states  seems  to  be  beyond 
anything  known  in  ordinary  consciousness.  It  evidently  involves 
organic  sensibilities,  for  it  is  spoken  of  as  something  too  extreme 
to  be  borne,  and  as  verging  on  bodily  pain.  But  it  is  too  subtle  and 
piercing  a  delight  for  ordinary  words  to  denote.  God's  touches, 
the  wounds  of  his  spear,  references  to  ebriety  and  to  mystical  union 
have  to  figure  in  the  phraseology  by  which  it  is  shadowed  forth. 

The  joy  of  communion  with  God,  described  by  St.  Simeon  the 
New  Theologian*  (X  century)  may  serve  as  an  example  of  such  an 
experience. 

I  am  wounded  by  the  arrow  of  His  love  (writes  St.  Simeon).  He  is 
Himself  inside  of  me,  in  my  heart;  he  embraces  me,  kisses  me,  fills  me 
with  light.  .  .  A  new  flower  grows  in  me,  new  because  it  is  joyous. 
.  .  This  flower  is  of  an  unutterable  form,  is  seen  when  it  grows  merely, 
then  suddenly  disappears  .  .  it  is  of  indescribable  appearance;  attracts 
my  mind  to  itself,  causes  forgetf ulness  of  everything  to  do  with  fear,  and 
then  flies  suddenly  away.  Then  does  the  tree  of  fear  remain  again 
lacking  fruit;  I  moan  in  sorrow  and  pray  to  thee,  my  Christ;  again  I  see 
the  flower  amid  the  branches,  I  chain  my  attention  to  it  alone,  and  see 
not  the  tree  alone,  but  the  brilliant  flower  attracting  me  to  itself  irresisti- 
bly; this  flower  grows  in  the  end  into  the  fruit  of  love.  .  .  Incom- 
prehensible is  it  how  from  fear  grows  love. 

Mysticism  penetrates  into  all  religions. 

"In  India,"  Prof.  James  says,  "training  in  mystical  insight  has 
been  known  from  time  immemorial  under  the  name  of  yoga. 
Yoga  means  the  experimental  union  of  the  individual  with  the 
divine.  It  is  based  on  presevering  exercise;  and  the  diet,  posture, 
breathing,  intellectual  concentration,  and  moral  discipline  vary 
slightly  in  the  different  systems  which  teach  it.  The  yogi,  or  dis- 
ciple, who  has  by  these  means  overcome  the  obscurations  of  his 
lower  nature  sufficiently,  enters  into  the  condition  termed 
samadhi,  'and  he  comes  face  to  face  with  facts  which  no  instinct 
or  reason  can  ever  know.' 

.  .  .  .  "When  a  man  comes  out  of  samadhi  Vedantists 
assure  us  that  he  remains  '  enlightened,  a  sage,  a  prophet,  a  saint, 
his  whole  character  changed,  his  life  changed,  illumined.' 

"The  Buddists  use  the  word ' samadhi'  as  well  as  the  Hindus;  but 
'dhyana'  is  their  special  word  for  higher  states  of  contemplation. 

"Higher  stages  still  of  contemplation  are  mentioned — a  region 
where  there  exists  nothing,  and  where  the  meditator  says :  '  There 
exists  absolutely  nothing,'  and  stops.  Then  he  reaches  another 
region,  he  says:     'There  are  neither  ideas  nor  absence  of  ideas,' 

♦Paul  Anikieff.    "Mysticism  of  St.  Simeon  the  New  Theologian".     St.  Petersburg,  1906. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  303 

and  stops  again.  Then  another  region  where,  'having  reached  the 
end  of  both  idea  and  perception,  he  stops  finally.  I  his  would 
seem  to  be,  not  yet  Nirvana,  but  as  close  an  approach  to  it  as  this 
life  affords.* 

In  Mohammedism  there  is  much  of  mysticism  also.  The  most 
characteristic  expression  of  Moslem  mysticism  is  Persian  Sufism. 
This  is  at  the  same  time  a  religious  sect  and  a  philosophical 
school  of  high  idealistic  character,  which  struggled  against  ma- 
terialism and  against  the  narrow  fanaticism  and  the  literal  under- 
standing of  the  Koran.  The  Sufis  interpreted  the  Koran  mysti- 
cally Sufism— this  is  the  philosophical  free-thinking  of  Moham- 
medanism, united  with  an  entirely  original  symbolical  and  brightly 
sensuous  poetry  which  has  always  a  hidden  mystical  character. 
The  blossoming  of  Sufism  occurred  in  the  early  centuries  ot  the 
second  millennium  of  the  Christian  era. 

Sufism  remained  for  a  long  time  incomprehensible  to  European 
thought.     From  the  point  of  view  of   Christian  theology  and 
Christian  morality  the  mixing  up  of  sensuousness  and  religious 
ecstacy  is  incomprehensible,  but  in  the  Orient  the  two  coexisted 
with  perfect  harmony.    In  the  Christian  world     the  flesh     has 
always  been  regarded  as  inimical  to  "the  spirit."    In  the  Moslem 
world  the  fleshly  and  sensuous  was  accepted  as  a  symbol  of 
spiritual  things.     The  expression  of  philosophical  and  religious 
truths  "in  the  language  of  love"  was   a   widely   disseminated 
custom   throughout   the   Orient.      These   things   are   "Oriental 
flowers  of  eloquence."     All  allegories,  all  metaphors  were  taken 
from  "love."     "Mohammed  fell  in  love  with  God"  the  Arabs  say, 
desiring  to  convey  the  brightness  of  the  religious  ardor  of  Mo- 
hammed.   "  Select  for  thyself  a  new  wife  every  spring  of  the  new  year, 
because  last  year's  calendar  is  no  good"— says  the  Persian  poet  and 
philosopher  Sadi.    And  in  such  curious  form  Sadi  expresses  the 
thought  that  Ibsen  puts  in  the  mouth  of  Dr.  Stockmann :       1  ruths 
are  not  as  many  believe  like  long  living  Methuselas.     Under  normal 
conditions  a  truth  may  exist  about  seventeen  or  eighteen  years,  rarely 

lonoer. 

The  poetry  of  the  Sufis  will  become  clearer  to  us  if  we  always 
keep  in  mind  this  general  sensuous  character  of  the  literary  lan- 
guage of  the  Orient,  the  heritage  of  profound  antiquity.  A  classic 
example  of  this  ancient  literature  is  the  "Song  of  Songs." 

Many  parts  of  the  Bible  and  all  ancient  myths  and  stories  are 
distinguished  by  a  sensuousness  of  form  strange  to  us. 

*Prof.  W.  James.     "The  Varieties  of  Religous  Experience."  pp.  400,  401. 


304  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

"The  Persian  mystical  poetical  Sufis  wrote  about  the  love  of 
God  in  expressions  applicable  to  their  beautiful  women,"  says  the 
translator  of  J  ami  and  other  poets,  Davis — "because,  as  they  ex- 
plained this,  nobody  can  write  in  heavenly  language  and  be  under- 
stood."   {Persian  Mystics.) 

"The  idea  of  Sufism,"  Max  Muller  says,  "is  a  loving  union  of 
the  soul  with  God."  "The  Sufi  holds  that  there  is  nothing  in  human 
language  that  can  express  the  love  between  the  soul  and  God  so 
well  as  the  love  between  man  and  woman  and  that  if  he  is  to 
speak  of  the  union  between  the  two  at  all,  he  can  only  do  so  in  the 
symbolic  language  of  earthly  love."  "When  we  read  some  of  the 
Sufi  enraptured  poetry,  we  must  remember  that  the  Sufi  poets 
use  a  number  of  expressions  which  have  a  recognized  meaning  in 
their  language.  Their  sleep  means  meditation;  perfume — hope 
of  divine  favor;  kisses  and  embraces — the  raptures  of  piety;  wine 
means  spiritual  knowledge,  etc. 

The  flowers  which  a  lover  of  God  had  gathered  in  his  rose-garden, 
and  which  he  wished  to  give  to  his  friends,  so  overpowered  his  mind  by 
their  fragrance  that  they  fell  out  of  his  lap  and  withered,  Sadi  says. 
A  poet  desires  to  express  by  this,  that  the  glory  of  ecstatic  visions  pales 
and  fades  away  when  it  has  to  be  put  into  human  language.— (Max 
Muller— "  Theosophy.") 

Generally  speaking,  never  and  nowhere  has  poetry  been  so 
blended  with  mysticism  as  in  Sufism.  The  Sufi  poets  frequently 
lived  the  strange  lives  of  hermits,  anachorites  and  wanderers,  at 
the  same  time  singing  of  love,  the  beauty  of  women,  the  aroma 
of  roses  and  wine. 

Jellal  eddin  describes  as  follows  the  communion  of  the  soul  with 
God: 

A  loved  one  said  to  her  lover  to  try  him  early  one  morning:  "O  such 
a  one,  son  of  such  a  one,  I  marvel  whether  you  hold  me  more  dear,  or 
yourself;  tell  me  truly,  O,  ardent  lover!"  He  answered:  "I  am  so  en- 
tirely absorbed  in  you,  that  I  am  full  of  you  from  head  to  foot.  Of  my 
own  existence  nothing  but  the  man  remains,  in  my  being  is  nothing 
beside  you,  О  object  of  my  desire.  Therefore  I  am  thus  lost  in  you.  As 
a  stone  which  has  been  changed  into  a  pure  ruby,  is  filled  with  the 
bright  light  of  the  sun."— (Max  Muller.) 

In  two  well  known  poems  of  J  ami  (XV  century),  "  Salaman  and 
Absal"  and  "  Yusuf  and  Zulaikha"  the  "ascending  of  the  soul," 
its  purification  and  its  union  with  God  is  represented  in  the  most 
passionate  forms. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  305 

Prof.  James  pays  great  attention  in  his  book  to  mystical  states 
under  narcosis. 

This  is  a  realm  that  public  opinion  and  ethical  philosophy  have 
long  since  branded  as  pathological,  though  private  practice  and 
certain  lyric  strains  of  poetry  seem  still  to  bear  witness  of  its 
ideality. 

"Nitrous  oxide  and  ether,  especially  nitrous  oxide,  when  suffi- 
ciently diluted  with  air,  stimulates  the  mystical  consciousness  in 
an  extraordinary  degree.  Depth  beyond  depth  of  truth  seems  re- 
vealed to  the  inhaler.  This  truth  fades  out,  however,  or  escapes, 
at  the  moment  of  coming  to ;  and  if  any  words  remain  over  in  which 
it  seemed  to  clothe  itself,  they  prove  to  be  the  veriest  nonsense. 
Nevertheless,  the  sense  of  a  profound  meaning  having  been  there 
persists;  and  I  know  more  than  one  person  who  is  persuaded  that 
in  the  nitrous  oxide  trance  we  have  a  genuine  metaphysical  reve- 
lation. 

"Some  years  ago  I  myself  made  some  observations  on  this 
aspect  of  nitrous  oxide  intoxication,  and  reported  them  in  print. 
One  conclusion  was  forced  upon  my  mind  at  that  time,  and  my 
impression  of  its  truth  has  ever  since  remained  unshaken.  It  is 
that  our  normal  waking  consciousness,  rational  consciousness  as 
we  call  it,  is  but  one  special  type  of  consciousness,  whilst  all  about 
it,  parted  from  it  by  the  filmiest  of  screens,  there  are  potential 
forms  of  consciousness  entirely  different.  We  may  go  through 
life  without  suspecting  their  existence;  but  apply  the  requisite 
stimulus  and  at  a  touch  they  are  there  in  all  their  completeness, 
definite  types  of  mentality  which  probably  somewhere  have  their 
field  of  application  and  adaptation.  No  account  of  the  universe 
in  its  totality  can  be  final  which  leaves  these  other  forms  of  con- 
sciousness quite  disregarded.  At  any  rate,  they  forbid  a  pre- 
mature closing  of  our  accounts  with  reality. 

"The  whole  drift  of  my  education  goes  to  persuade  me  that  the 
world  of  our  present  consciousness  is  only  one  out  of  many  worlds 
of  consciousness  that  exist,  and  that  those  other  worlds  must  con- 
tain experiences  which  have  a  meaning  for  our  life  also. 

"Looking  back  on  my  experiences,  they  all  converge  towards 
a  kind  of  insight  to  which  I  cannot  help  ascribing  some  meta- 
physical significance.  The  keynote  of  it  is  invariably  a  recon- 
ciliation. It  is  as  if  the  opposites  of  the  world,  whose  contradic- 
tions and  conflict  make  all  our  difficulties  and  troubles,  were 
melted  into  unity.    Not  only  do  they,  as  contrasted  species,  be- 


306  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

long  to  one  and  the  same  genus,  but  one  of  the  species  the  nobler 
and  the  better  one — is  itself  the  genus,  so  soaks  up  and  absorbs  its 
opposite  into  itself.  This  is  a  dark  saying,  I  know,  when  thus  ex- 
pressed in  terms  of  common  logic,  but  I  cannot  wholly  escape 
from  its  authority.  I  feel  as  if  it  must  mean  something,  something 
like  what  the  Hegelian  philosophy  means,  if  one  could  only  lay 
hold  of  it  more  clearly.  Those  who  have  ears  to  hear  let  them 
hear;  to  me  the  loving  sense  of  its  reality  only  comes  in  the  arti- 
ficial mystic  state  of  mind. 

"What  reader  of  Hegel  can  doubt  that  sense  of  a  perfected 
being  with  all  its  otherness  soaked  up  in  itself,  which  dominates 
his  whole  philosophy,  must  have  come  from  the  prominence  in  his 
consciousness  of  mystical  moods  like  this,  in  most  persons  kept 
subliminal?  The  notion  is  thoroughly  characteristic  of  the  mys- 
tical level,  and  the  Aufgabe  (the  problem)  of  making  it  articulate 
was  surely  set  to  Hegel's  intellect  by  mystical  feeling. 

"I  have  friends  who  believe  in  the  anaesthetic  revelation.  For 
them  too  it  is  a  monistic  insight,  in  which  the  other  in  its  various 
forms  appears  absorbed  into  the  One.* 

"Into  this  pervading  genus,"  writes  one  of  them,  "we  pass,  forgetting 
and  forgotten,  and  thenceforth  each  is  all,  in  God.  There  is  no  higher, 
no  deeper,  no  other,  than  the  life  in  which  we  are  founded.  The  one 
remains,  the  many  change  and  pass;  and  each  and  every  one  of  us  is  the 
One  that  remains.  .  .  This  is  the  ultimatum.  .  .  As  sure  as 
being — whence  is  all  our  care — so  sure  is  content,  beyond  duplexity, 
antithesis,  or  trouble,  where  I  have  triumphed  in  a  solitude  that  God 

is  not  above."  -  ™  -i 

(В.  P.  Blood:  "The  Anaesthetic  Revelation  and  the  Gist  of  Philoso- 
phy," Amsterdam,  N.  Y.,  1874.)  .      ,     ,     ,  . 
Xenos  Clark,  a  philosopher  who  died  young  (at  Amherst  in  the  80  s) 
was  also  impressed  by  the  revelation. 

"In  the  first  place,"  he  once  wrote  to  me,  "Mr.  Blood  and  I  agree  that 
the  revelation  is,  if  anything,  non-emotional.  It  is,  as  Mr.  Blood  says, 
"the  one  sole  and  sufficient  insight  why  or  not  why,  but  how,  the  present 
is  pushed  on  by  the  past,  and  sucked  forward  by  the  vacuity  of  the 
future.  .  It  is  an  initiation  of  the  past.  The  real  secret  would  be  the  form- 
ula by  which  the  "now"  keeps  exfoliating  out  of  itself,  yet  never  escapes. 
We  simply  fill  the  hole  with  the  dirt  we  dug  out.  Ordinary  philosophy 
is  like  a  hound  hunting  its  own  tail.  The  more  he  hunts  the  farther  he 
has  to  go,  and  his  nose  never  catches  up  with  his  heels,  because  it  is  for- 
ever ahead  of  them.  So  the  present  is  already  a  foregone  conclusion, 
and  I  am  ever  too  late  to  understand  it.  But  at  the  moment  of  recovery 
from  anaesthesis,  then,  before  starting  on  life,  I  catch,  so  to  speak,  a  glimpse 
of  my  heels,  a  glimpse  of  the  eternal  process  just  in  the  act  of  starting.  The 
truth  is  that  we  travel  on  a  journey  that  was  accomplished  before  we 

*Prof.  William  James,    "The   Varieties   of   Religious   Experience."      Lectures   XVI    and   XVII. 

Mysticism. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  307 

set  out;  and  the  real  end  of  philosophy  is  accomplished,  not  when  we 
arrive  at,  but  when  we  remain  in,  our  destination  (being  already  there), 
— which  may  occur  vicariously  in  this  life  when  we  cease  our  intellectual 
questioning.  That  is  why  there  is  a  smile  upon  the  face  of  revelation,  as 
we  view  it.  It  tells  us  that  we  are  forever  half  a  second  too  late — that's  all . 

"You  could  kiss  your  own  lips,  and  have  all  the  fun  to  yourself,"  it 
says,  if  you  only  knew  the  trick.  It  would  be  perfectly  easy  if  they  would 
just  stay  there  till  you  got  around  to  them.  Why  don't  you  manage 
it  somehow? 

In  his  latest  pamphlet  Mr.  Blood  describes  the  value  of  the  anaesthetic 
revelation  for  life  as  follows : 

"The  Anaesthetic  Revelation  is  the  initiation  of  man  into  the  mystery 
of  the  open  secret  of  Being,  revealed  as  the  inevitable  vortex  of  con- 
tinuity. Inevitable  is  the  word.  Its  motive  is  inherent — it  is  what  has 
to  be.  It  is  not  for  any  love  or  hate,  nor  for  joy  or  sorrow,  nor  good 
nor  ill.    End,  beginning,  or  purpose,  it  knows  not  of. 

"It  affords  no  particular  of  the  multiplicity  and  variety  of  things: 
but  it  fills  appreciation  of  the  historical  and  the  sacred  with  a  secular 
and  intimately  personal  illumination  of  the  nature  and  motive  of  exist- 
ence.    .     . 

"Although  it  is  at  first  startling  in  its  solemnity,  it  becomes  directly 
such  a  matter  of  course — so  old-fashioned,  and  so  akin  to  proverbs, 
that  it  inspires  exultation  rather  than  fear,  and  the  sense  of  safety,  as 
identified  with  the  aboriginal  and  the  universal.  But  no  words  may 
express  the  surpassing  certainty  of  the  patient  that  he  is  realizing  the 
primordial  Adamic  surprise  of  life. 

"Repetition  of  the  experience  finds  it  ever  the  same,  and  as  if  it  could 
not  possibly  be  otherwise.  The  subject  resumes  his  normal  conscious- 
ness only  to  partially  and  fitfully  remember  its  occurrence,  and  to  try 
to  formulate  its  baffling  import, — with  only  this  consolatory  after- 
thought :  that  he  has  known  the  oldest  truth,  and  that  he  has  done  with 
human  theories  as  to  the  origin,  meaning,  or  destiny  of  the  race.  He  is 
beyond  instruction  in  "spiritual  things." 

"The  lesson  is  one  of  central  safety;  the  kingdom  is  within.  All  days 
are  judgment  days :  but  there  can  be  no  climacteric  purpose  of  eternity, 
nor  any  scheme  of  the  whole.  The  astronomer  abridges  the  row  of  be- 
wildering figures  by  increasing  his  unit  of  measurement:  so  may  we 
reduce  the  distracting  multiplicity  of  things  to  the  unity  for  which  each 
of  us  stands. 

"This  has  been  my  moral  sustenance  since  I  have  known  of  it.  In 
my  first  printed  mention  of  it  I  declared:  The  world  is  no  more  the 
alien  terror  that  was  taught  me.  Spurning  the  cloud-grimed  and  still 
sultry  battlements  whence  so  lately  Jehovan  thunders  boomed,  my 
gray  gull  lifts  her  wings  against  the  nightfall,  and  takes  the  dim  leagues 
with  a  fearless  eye.  And  now,  after  twenty-seven  years  of  this  experi- 
ence, the  wing  is  grayer,  but  the  eye  is  fearless  still,  while  I  renew  and 
doubly  emphasize  that  declaration.  I  know — as  having  known — the 
meaning  of  existence:  the  sane  center  of  the  universe — at  once  the 
wonder  and  the  assurance  of  the  soul — for  which  the  speech  of  reason 
has  as  yet  no  name  but  the  Anaesthetic  Revelations. 


308  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

I  subjoin,  Prof.  James  says,  another  interesting  anaesthetic 
revelation.  This  is  what  the  subject,  a  gifted  woman,  writes 
about  her  experience,  when  she  was  taking  ether  for  a  surgical 
operation. 

"I  wondered  if  I  was  in  a  prison  being  tortured,  and  why  I  remem- 
bered, having  heard  it  said  that  people  'learn  through  suffering,'  and 
in  view  of  what  I  was  seeing,  the  inadequacy  of  this  saying  struck  me  so 
much  that  I  said,  aloud,  'to  suffer  is  to  learn.'  With  that  I  became  un- 
conscious again,  and  my  last  dream  immediately  preceded  my  real 
coming  to.  It  only  lasted  a  few  seconds  and  was  most  vivid  and  real 
to  me,  though  it  may  not  be  clear  in  words. 

"A  great  Being  or  Power  was  traveling  through  the  sky,  his  foot  was 
on  a  kind  of  lightning  as  a  wheel  is  on  a  rail,  it  was  his  pathway.  The 
lightning  was  made  of  innumerable  spirits  close  to  one  another,  and  I 
was  one  of  them.  He  moved  in  a  straight  line,  and  each  part  of  the 
streak  or  flash  came  into  its  short  conscious  existence  only  that  he 
might  travel.  I  seemed  to  be  directly  under  the  foot  of  God,  and  I 
thought  he  was  grinding  his  own  life  up  out  of  my  pain.  Then  I  saw 
that  what  he  had  been  trying  with  all  his  might  to  do  was  to  change  his 
course,  to  bend  the  line  of  lightning  to  which  he  was  tied,  in  the  direction 
in  which  he  wanted  to  go.  I  felt  my  flexibility  and  helplessness,  and  I 
knew  that  he  would  succeed.  He  bended  me,  turning  his  corner  by 
means  of  my  hurt,  hurting  me  more  than  I  had  ever  been  hurt  in  my 
life,  and  at  the  acutest  point  of  this,  as  he  passed,  I  SAW. 

"I  understood  for  a  moment  things  that  I  have  now  forgotten,  things 
that  no  one  could  remember  while  retaining  sanity.  The  angle  was  an 
obtuse  angle,  and  I  remember  thinking  as  I  woke  that  had  he  made  it 
a  right  or  acute  angle,  I  should  have  both  suffered  and  'seen'  still  more, 
and  should  probably  have  died. 

"He  went  on  and  I  came  to.  In  that  moment  the  whole  of  my  life 
passed  before  me,  including  each  little  meaningless  piece  of  distress,  and 
I  understood  them.  This  is  what  it  had  all  meant,  this  was  the  piece  of 
work  it  had  all  been  contributing  to  do. 

"I  did  not  see  God's  purpose.  I  only  saw  his  intentness  and  his  entire 
relentlessness  towards  his  means.  He  thought  no  more  of  me  than  a  man 
thinks  of  hurting  a  cartridge  when  he  is  firing.  And  yet,  on  waking,  my 
first  feeling  was,  and  it  came  with  tears,  'Domine  non  sum  dogna,'  for 
I  had  been  lifted  into  a  position  for  which  I  was  too  small.  I  realized 
that  in  that  half  hour  under  ether  I  had  served  God  more  distinctly  and 
purely  than  I  had  ever  done  in  my  life  before,  or  than  I  am  capable  of 
desiring  to  do.  I  was  the  means  of  his  achieving  and  revealing  something, 
I  know  not  what  or  to  whom,  and  that  to  the  exact  extent  of  my  capac- 
ity for  suffering. 

"While  regaining  consciousness  I  wondered  why,  since  I  had  gone  so 
deep,  I  had  seen  nothing  of  what  saints  call  the  love  of  God,  nothing  but 
his  relentlessness.  And  then  I  heard  an  answer,  which  I  could  only  just 
catch,  saying,  '  Knowledge  and  Love  are  One,  and  the  measure  is  suffer- 
ing'— I  give  words  as  they  came  to  me.    With  that  I  came  finally  to 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  309 

into  what  seemed  a  dream  world  compared  with  the  reality  of  what  I 
was  leaving.    .    .  " 

I.  S.  Symonds,  whom  Prof.  James  mentions  tells  of  an  interest- 
ing mystical  experience  with  chloroform: 

"After  the  choking  and  stifling  had  passed  away,  I  seemed  at  first 
in  a  state  of  utter  blankness,  then  came  flashes  of  intense  light,  alter- 
nating with  blackness,  and  with  a  keen  vision  of  what  was  going  on  in 
the  room  around  me,  but  no  sensation  of  touch.  I  thought  that  I  was 
near  death;  when  suddenly,  my  soul  became  aware  of  God,  who  was 
manifestly  dealing  with  me,  handling  me,  so  to  speak,  in  an  intense 
personal  present  reality.  I  felt  him  streaming  in  like  light  upon  me. 
I  cannot  describe  the  ecstasy  I  felt.  Then  as  I  gradually  awoke  from 
the  influence  of  the  anaesthetic,  the  old  sense  of  my  relation  to  the  world 
began  to  return,  and  the  new  sense  of  my  relation  to  God  began  to  fade. 
I  suddenly  leapt  to  my  feet  on  the  chair  where  I  was  sitting,  and 
shrieked  out,  'It  is  too  horrible,  it  is  too  horrible,  it  is  too  horrible,' 
meaning  that  I  could  not  bear  this  disillusionment.    At  last  I  awoke 

.  .  .  calling  to  the  two  surgeons  (who  were  frightened)  'why  did 
you  not  kill  me?    Why  would  you  not  let  me  die?'  " 

Anaesthetic  states  are  very  similar  to  those  strange  moments 
experienced  by  epileptics  during  their  fits  of  illness.  An  artistic 
description  of  epileptic  states  we  find  in  Dostoyevsky's,  "The 
Idiot." 

He  remembered  among  other  things  that  he  always  had  one  minute 
just  before  the  epileptic  fit  (if  it  came  on  while  he  was  awake)  when  sud- 
denly in  the  midst  of  sadness,  spiritual  darkness  and  oppression,  there 
seemed  at  moments  a  flash  of  light  on  his  brain  and  with  extraordinary 
impetus  all  his  vital  forces  suddenly  began  working  at  their  highest 
tension.  The  sense  of  life,  the  consciousness  of  self,  were  multiplied  ten 
times  at  these  moments  which  passed  like  a  flash  of  lightning.  His  mind 
and  his  heart  were  flooded  with  extraordinary  light;  all  his  uneasiness, 
all  his  doubts,  all  his  anxieties  were  relieved  at  once;  they  were  all  merged 
in  a  lofty  calm,  full  of  serene,  harmonious  joy  and  hope. 

Thinking  of  that  moment  later,  when  he  was  all  right  again,  he  often 
said  to  himself  that  all  these  gleams  and  flashes  of  the  highest  sensation 
of  life  and  self -consciousness,  and  therefore  also  of  the  highest  form  of 
existence,  were  nothing  but  disease,  the  interruption  of  the  normal  con- 
dition. .  .  And  yet  he  came  at  last  to  an  extremely  paradoxical  con- 
clusion. What  if  it  is  disease?  he  decided,  if  the  result,  if  the  minute 
of  sensation,  remembered  and  analyzed  afterwards  in  health,  turns  out 
to  be  the  acme  of  harmony  and  beauty,  and  gives  a  feeling,  unknown 
and  undivined  till  then,  of  completeness,  of  proportion,  of  reconciliation, 
and  of  ecstatic  devotional  merging  in  the  highest  synthesis  of  life? 

These  vague  expressions  seemed  to  him  very  comprehensible,  though 
too  weak.  That  it  was  "beauty  and  worship,"  that  it  really  was  the 
"highest  synthesis  of  life"  he  could  not  doubt,  and  could  not  admit  the 
possibility  of  doubt.     .     .     He  was  quite  capable  of  judging  of  that 


SI 0  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

when  the  attack  was  over.  These  moments  were  only  an  extraordinary- 
quickening  of  self-consciousness — if  the  condition  was  to  be  expressed 
in  one  word — and  at  the  same  time  of  the  direct  sensation  of  existence 
in  the  most  intense  degree.  Since  at  that  second,  that  is  at  the  very- 
last  conscious  moment  before  the  fit,  he  had  time  to  say  to  himself 
clearly  and  consciously,  "Yet  for  this  moment  one  might  give  one's 
whole  life!"  Then  without  doubt  that  moment  was  really  worth  the 
whole  of  life.  .  .  For  the  very  thing  had  happened ;  he  actually  had 
said  to  himself  at  that  second,  that,  for  the  infinite  happiness  he  had  felt 
in  it,  that  second  really  might  well  be  worth  the  whole  of  life. 

"At  that  moment,"  as  he  told  Rogozhin  one  day  in  Moscow  .  .  "at 
that  moment  I  seemed  somehow  to  understand  the  extraordinary  say- 
ing that  there  shall  be  time  no  longer.  Probably,"  he  added,  smiling, 
"this  is  the  very  second  which  was  not  long  enough  for  the  water  to  be 
spilt  out  of  Mohammed's  pitcher,  though  the  epileptic  prophet  had  time 
to  gaze  at  all  the  habitations  of  Allah.* 

Narcosis  or  epilepsy  are  not  at  all  necessary  conditions  to  induce 
mystical  states  in  ordinary  men. 

"Certain  aspects  of  nature  appear  to  have  the  peculiar  power 
of  awakening  such  mystical  moods,"  says  James. 

It  would  be  more  correct  to  say  that  in  all  conditions  of  encom- 
passing nature  this  power  lies  concealed.  The  change  of  the 
seasons — the  first  snow,  the  awakening  of  spring,  the  summer 
days  rainy  and  warm,  the  aroma  of  autumn — awake  in  us  strange 
"moods"  which  we  ourselves  do  not  understand.  Sometimes 
these  moods  intensify,  and  become  the  sensation  of  a  complete 
oneness  with  nature.  In  the  life  of  every  man  there  are  moments 
which  act  upon  him  more  powerfully  than  others.  Upon  one  a 
thunderstorm  acts  mystically,  upon  another,  sunrise,  a  third  is  as  it 
were  hypnotized  and  attracted  by  the  sea,  a  fourth  is  absorbed, 
filled  and  subjugated  by  the  forest,  a  fifth  is  drawn  and  instructed 
by  rocks,  a  sixth,  by  fire.  The  voice  of  sex,  the  influence  on  man 
of  woman,  and  on  woman  of  man  embraces  much  of  that  same 
mystical  sense  of  nature  aroused  by  forest,  prairie,  sea.     .     . 

The  voice  of  sex,  the  influence  of  the  "eternal  feminine"  on 
man  and  the  "eternal  masculine"  on  woman  includes  within 
itself  the  most  powerful  and  the  most  personal  sensation  of  na- 
ture; in  the  sex  impulse  man  puts  himself  in  the  most  personal 
relation  with  nature.  The  comparison  of  the  sensation  of  woman 
by  man,  or  vice  versa,  with  the  feeling  for  nature  is  met  with  very 
often.  And  it  is  really  the  same  sensation  which  is  given  by  forest, 
prairie,  sea,  mountains,  only  in  this  case  it  is  even  more  intense, 
awakens  more  inner  voices,  forces  the  sounding  of  more  inner 
strings. 

*"The  Idiot"  by  Fyodor  Dostoyevsky,  transl.  of  Constance  Garnett,  New  York,  the  MacmillaD 
Co. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  311 


Animals  often  give  the  mystical  sensation  of  nature  to  men. 
Almost  everyone  has  his  favorite  animal,  with  which  he  has  some 
inner  affinity.  In  these  animals,  or  through  them,  men  sense 
nature  intimately  and  personally. 

In  Hindu  magic  there  is  the  belief  that  every  man  has  his  cor- 
responding animal,  through  which  it  is  possible  to  act  upon  him 
through  which  he  himself  can  act  upon  others,  and  into  which  ne 
can  transform  himself  or  be  by  others  transformed. 

Each  Hindu  deity  has  his  own  particular  annua  . 

Brahma  has  a  goose;  Vishnu  an  eagle;  Siva  a  bull;  Indra  an 
elephant;  Kali  (Durga)  a  tiger;  Rama  a  buffalo;  Ganesha  a  rat 
Agni  a  ram;  Kartikkeya  (or  Subrananyia)  a  peacock,  and  Kama 
(the  god  of  love)  a  parrot. 

The  same  thing  is  true  of  Greece:  all  the  deities  of  Olympus  had 

their  animals.  ,        , 

In  the  religion  of  Egypt  sacred  animals  played  an  enormous 
part,  and  in  Egypt  the  cat,  the  most  unique  of  all  animals,  was  held 

np   ЧЯОГСС1  •       i 

The  sense  of  nature  sometimes  unfolds  something  infinitely  new 
and  profound  in  things  which  seemed  to  have  been  known  a  long 
time  and  in  themselves  contained  nothing  mystical. 

The  consciousness  of  God's  nearness  came  to  me  «inefcnjes^ote. 
Prof  James)  ...  a  presence,  I  might  say  .  .  something  in 
myself  m"de  me  feel  apart  of  something  bigger  than  I,  ^«con- 
trolling I  felt  myself  one  with  the  grass,  the  trees,  birds,  insects, 
eve  ythmg  in  Nature.  I  exulted  in  the  mere  fact  of  existence,  of  being  a 
plrtof  it  all-the  drizzling  rain,  the  shadow  of  the  clouds,  the  tree- 
trunks,  and  so  on. 

In  my  own  note  book  I  found  a  description  of  the  same  experi- 
enced state  of  consciousness. 

It  was  in  the  sea  of  Marmora,  on  a  rainy  day  of  winter,  the  far  off  high 
and  rocL;  shores  were  of  a  pronounced  violet  color  of  ev ery: shade   in- 
cluding the  most  tender,  fading  into  gray  and lb  ending  with  t  he  gray 
sky     The  sea  was  the  color  of  lead  mixed  with  silver     I  remember  all 
?hese  colors.    The  steamer  was  going  north.    I  remained  at  the  rail,  look- 
in  fat  the  waves.    The  white  crests  of  waves  were  running  toward  us 
Agwavc  wonld  ™  at  the  ship,  raised  as  though  desiring  to  hurl  Us  crest 
uoonlt  mshing  up  with  a  howl.     The  steamer  heeled,  shuddered,  and 
Xwlv  straightened  back;  then  from  afar  a  new  wave  came  running. 
I  watdfcd  ffiay  of  the  waves  with  the  ship,  and  felt  them  draw  me 
о  themselves.  Vwas  not  at  all  that  desire  to  jump .down  which  one 
feels  in  mountains  but  something  infinitely  more  subtle     The  waves 
were  drawing  my  soul  to  themselves.    And  suddenly  I  felt  that  it  went 
Го  them     It  lasted  an  instant,  perhaps  less  than  an  instant,  but  I  entered 


312  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

into  the  waves  and  with  them  rushed  with  a  howl  at  the  ship.  And  in 
that  instant  I  became  all.  The  waves — they  were  myself:  the  far  violet 
mountains,  the  wind,  the  clouds  hurrying  from  the  north,  the  great 
steamship,  heeling  and  rushing  irresistibly  forward — all  were  my- 
self. I  sensed  the  enormous  heavy  body — my  body — all  its  motions, 
shudderings,  waverings  and  vibrations,  fire,  pressure  of  steam  and 
weight  of  engines  were  inside  of  me,  the  unmerciful  and  unyielding  pro- 
pelling screw  which  pushed  and  pushed  me  forward,  never  for  a  moment 
releasing  me,  the  rudder  which  determined  all  my  motion — all  this  was 
myself:  also  two  sailors.  .  .  and  the  black  snake  of  smoke  coming 
in  clouds  out  of  the  funnel     .     .     all. 

It  was  an  instant  of  unusual  freedom,  joy  and  expansion.  A  second — 
and  the  spell  of  charm  disappeared.  It  passed  like  a  dream  when  one 
tries  to  remember  it.  But  the  sensation  was  so  powerful,  so  bright,  and 
so  unusual  that  I  was  afraid  to  move  and  waited  for  it  to  recur.  But  it 
did  not  return,  and  a  moment  later  I  could  not  say  that  it  had  been — 
could  not  say  whether  it  was  a  reality  or  merely  the  thought  that,  looking 
at  the  waves,  it  might  be  so. 

Two  years  afterward  the  yellowish  waves  of  the  Finnish  gulf  and  a 
green  sky  gave  me  a  taste  of  the  same  sensation,  but  this  time  it  was 
dissipated  almost  before  it  appeared. 

Similar  experiences  and  the  description  of  experiments  of  the 
artificial  induction  of  them  by  the  aid  of  narcotics  or  without  that 
aid,  will  enter  into  the  book,  "The  Wisdom  of  the  Gods"  in  a 
chapter  on  experimental  mysticism. 

The  examples  given  in  this  chapter  do  not  by  any  means  exhaust 
the  mystical  experience  of  humanity. 

But  what  do  we  infer  from  them? 

First  of  all,  unity  of  experience.  In  mystical  sensations  all  men 
experience  something  in  common,  having  a  similar  meaning  and 
connection  one  with  another.  The  mystics  of  many  ages  and 
many  peoples  speak  the  same  language  and  use  the  same  words. 
This  is  the  first  and  most  important  thing  that  speaks  for  the  re- 
ality of  the  mystical  experience.  Next  is  the  complete  harmony 
of  data  regarding  such  experience  with  the  theoretically  deduced 
conditions  of  the  world  of  causes;  the  sensation  of  the  unity  of  all, 
so  characteristic  of  mysticism;  a  new  sensation  of  time;  the  sense 
of  infinity;  joy  or  horror;  knowledge  of  the  whole  in  the  part; 
infinite  life  and  infinite  consciousness.  All  these  are  real  sensed 
facts  in  the  mystical  experience.  And  these  facts  are  theoretically 
correct.  They  are  such  as  they  should  be  according  to  the  con- 
clusions   of    THE    MATHEMATICS    OF    THE    INFINITE    AND    OF    THE 

higher  logic.    This  is  all  that  it  is  possible  to  say  about  them. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

'Cosmic  Consciousness"  of  Dr.  Bucke,  The  three  forms  of  conscious- 
ness according  to  Dr.  Bucke.  Simple  consciousness,  or  the  con- 
sciousness of  animals.  Self-consciousness,  or  the  consciousness 
of  men.  Cosmic  consciousness.  In  what  is  it  expressed?  Sen- 
sation, perception,  concept,  higher  moral  concept-creative 
intuition.  Men  of  cosmic  consciousness.  Adam  s  fall  into  sin 
The  knowledge  of  good  and  evil  Christ  and.  the  salvation  of 
man.  Commentary  on  Dr.  Bucke's  book.  Birth  of  the  new 
humanity.  Two  races,  superman.  Table  of  the  four  forms 
of  the  manifestation  of  consciousness. 

"ERY  many  men  believe  that  the  fundamental  prob- 
lems of  life  are  absolutely  unsolvable,  that  humanity 
will  never  know  why  it  is  striving,  or  for  what  it  is  striv- 
ing, for  what  it  suffers,  or  whither  it  is  bound.  It  is 
regarded  as  almost  indecent  even  to  raise  these  ques- 
ions  It  is  decreed  that  we  live  "so"— that  we  "simply  live." 
Men  have  despaired  of  finding  answers  to  these  questions  and  so 
have  left  them  alone. 

Yet  at  the  same  time  men  are  not  in  the  least  aware  of  what 
really  created  in  them  such  a  sense  of  insolubility  and  despair. 
Whence  comes  this  feeling  that  it  is  better  not  to  think  about  these 

th%7lQS^ 

In  reality  we  feel  this  despair  only  when  we  begin  to  regard  man 
as  something  "finite,"  finished;  when  we  see  nothing  beyond  man 
and  think  that  we  know  already  everything  about  him  In  such 
form  the  problem  is  truly  a  desperate  one.  A  cold  wind  blows  on 
us  from  all  those  social  theories  promising  incalculable  welfare 
on  earth,  leaving  a  sense  of  dissatisfaction  and  chill. 

Why?  What  is  all  this  for?  Well,  everybody  will  be  well  fed 
and  weil  taken  care  of  .—Splendid!    But  after  that,  what? 

Of  course,  until  humanity  shall  free  itself  from  hunger  and  need; 
so  long  as  luxurious  palaces  and  comfortable  houses  exist  along- 
side of  foul  and  sordid  slums,  so  long  as  among  us  men  drown  and 
hang   themselves  from  hunger  and   despair,   so  long  as   wars, 

313 


314  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

prisons,  violence  exist  we  have  no  right  to  speak  either  of  culture 
or  of  civilization. 

But  let  us  suppose  that  nothing  of  this  kind  exists.  Although 
it  is  difficult,  almost  impossible  to  imagine  that  materialistic  cul- 
ture, of  itself,  could  lead  men  to  a  fortunate  state  of  existence,  let 
us  nevertheless  assume  that  such  is  the  case.  On  earth,  then, 
there  exists  an  unadulterated  civilization  and  culture.  Nobody 
throttles  anybody  else.  All  are  permitted  to  draw  their  breath 
in  peace.    But  after  that,  what? 

After  that  many  resounding  phrases  of  "incredible  horizons" 
opening  before  science :  "  Communication  with  the  planet  Mars," 
"The  chemical  synthesis  of  protoplasm,"  "The  utilization  of  the 
rotation  of  the  earth  around  the  sun,"  "Vaccine  for  all  diseases," 
"Life  to  the  length  of  a  hundred  years" — or  even  to  one  hundred  and 
fifty!  After  that  perhaps,  "The  artificial  creation  of  men" — but 
beyond  this  imagination  fails. 

It  is  possible  to  dig  through  the  earth,  but  that  would  be  en- 
tirely useless. 

Here  indeed  enters  that  feeling  of  the  insolubility  of  the  main 
questions  concerning  the  aims  of  existence,  and  that  feeling  of 
despair  on  account  of  our  lack  of  understanding. 

Truly,  suppose  that  we  have  dug  completely  through  the 
earth — what  then?  Shall  we  dig  in  another  direction?  But  it  is 
all  very  wearisome  after  all.  Nevertheless  the  various  positivistic 
social  theories,  "historical  materialism"  and  so  forth,  promise 
nothing  better,  and  can  promise  nothing.  To  get  any  answer  at 
all  to  such  tormenting  questions  we  must  turn  in  quite  another 
direction:  to  the  psychological  method  of  study  of  man  and  of 
humanity.  And  here  we  see  with  amazement,  that  the  psycholog- 
ical method  gives  an  entirely  satisfactory  answer  to  those  funda- 
mental questions  which  seem  to  us  quite  insoluble,  and  around 
about  which  we  fruitlessly  wander  equipped  with  the  defective 
instrument  of  the  positivistic  method. 

The  psychological  method  gives  a  direct  answer  at  least  to  the 
question  of  the  immediate  purpose  of  our  existence.  For  some 
strange  reason  men  do  not  care  to  accept  this  answer;  and  they 
desire  at  all  costs  to  receive  an  answer  in  some  form  that  they 
like,  refusing  to  recognize  anything  that  is  different  from  that 
form.  They  require  the  solution  of  the  destiny  of  man  as  they 
fancy  him,  and  they  do  not  want  to  recognize  that  man  is  some- 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  315 

thing  entirely  different.  In  him  there  are  not  yet  manifest  those 
faculties  which  will  reveal  his  future  to  himself.  Man  must  not 
and  cannot  remain  such  as  he  is  now.  To  think  of  the  future  of 
this  man  is  just  as  absurd  as  to  think  of  the  future  of  a  child  as 
though  it  were  always  going  to  remain  a  child.  The  analogy  is  not 
quite  complete,  for  the  reason  that  probably  only  a  small  part  of 
humanity  is  capable  of  growth,  but  nevertheless  this  comparison 
paints  a  true  picture  of  our  usual  attitude  toward  this  question. 
And  the  fate  of  that  greater  part  of  humanity  which  will  prove  in- 
capable of  growth,  depends  not  upon  itself,  but  upon  that  minor- 
ity which  will  progress.  Only  inner  growth,  the  unfoldment  of 
new  forces,  will  give  to  man  a  correct  understanding  of  himself, 
his  ways,  his  future,  and  give  him  power  to  organize  life  on  earth. 
At  the  present  time  man  is  a  being  too  undifferentiated.  The 
general  concept  "man"  includes  within  itself  types  with  entirely 
different  futures,  those  capable  of  development  and  those  incapable, 
and  perhaps  types  of  quite  different  origin.  In  men  capable  of 
development,  many  new  faculties  are  stirring  into  life,  though  not 
yet  manifest,  because  for  their  manifestation  they  require  a  special 
culture,  a  special  education.  The  new  conception  of  humanity 
disposes  of  the  idea  of  equality,  which  after  all  does  not  exist,  and 
it  tries  to  establish  the  signs  and  facts  of  the  differences  between 
men,  because  humanity  will  need  soon  to  divide  the  "progressing" 
from  the  "incapable  of  progress" — the  wheat  from  the  tares,  for  the 
tares  are  growing  too  fast,  and  choke  the  growth  of  the  wheat. 

This  is  the  key  to  the  understanding  of  our  life,  and  this  key 
was  found  long  ago! 

The  enigma  was  solved  long  ago.  But  different  thinkers,  living 
in  different  epochs,  finding  the  solution,  called  it  by  different 
names,  and  often,  not  knowing  one  another,  trod  the  same  path 
amid  enormous  difficulties,  unaware  of  their  predecessors  and  con- 
temporaries who  had  gone  and  were  going  along  the  selfsame  path. 

In  the  world's  literature  there  exist  books,  usually  little  known, 
which  accidentally  or  by  design  may  happen  to  be  assembled  on 
one  shelf  in  one  library.  These,  taken  together,  will  yield  so  clear 
and  complete  a  picture  of  the  human  being,  that  there  will  be  no 
further  doubts  about  the  destiny  of  humanity  (though  only  its 
minor  part),  but  a  destiny  of  quite  a  different  sort  from  those  hard 
labors  of  digging  through  the  globe,  which  positive  philosophy 
and  "historical  materialism"  has  in  store  for  him. 


316  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

And  if  it  seems  to  us  that  we  do  not  yet  know  our  destiny,  if 
we  still  doubt,  and  do  not  dare  to  part  with  the  hopeless  "posi- 
tivistic"  view  of  life,  this  is  because,  firstly,  two  human  types, 
having  quite  different  futures,  are  commingled  into  one  in  our 
perception;  and  secondly,  the  necessary  ideas  by  means  of  which 
we  might  understand  the  true  relation  of  forces,  have  not  won 
for  themselves  their  rightful  place  in  official  science,  do  not  repre- 
sent any  recognized  division  or  branch  of  science;  it  is  rarely  possi- 
ble to  find  them  all  in  one  book  and  it  is  even  rarely  possible  to 
find  books  expressing  these  ideas  assembled  together. 

We  do  not  understand  many  things  because  we  too  easily  and 
too  arbitrarily  specialize.  Philosophy,  religion,  psychology, 
mathematics,  the  natural  sciences,  sociology,  the  history  of  cul- 
ture, art — each  has  its  own  separate  literature.  There  is  no  com- 
plete whole  at  all.  Even  the  little  bridges  between  these  separate 
literatures  are  built  very  badly  and  unsuccessfully,  while  they 
are  often  altogether  absent.  And  this  formation  of  special  litera- 
tures is  the  chief  evil  and  the  chief  obstacle  to  a  correct  under- 
standing of  things.  Each  "literature"  elaborates  its  own  termi- 
nology, its  own  language,  which  is  incomprehensible  to  the  students 
of  other  literatures,  and  does  not  coincide  with  other  languages ;  by 
this  it  defines  its  own  limits  the  more  sharply,  divides  itself  from 
others,  and  makes  these  limits  impassable. 

What  we  have  needed  for  a  long  time  is  synthesis. 

The  word  synthesis  was  emblazoned  on  the  banner  of  the  con- 
temporary theosophical  movement  started  by  H.  P.  Blavatsky. 
But  this  word  remained  a  word  only,  because  in  reality  a  new 
specialization  was  created,  and  a  theosophical  literature  of  its  own, 
separating,  and  striving  even  more  to  separate  and  fence  itself 
off  from  the  general  movement  of  thought. 

But  there  are  movements  of  thought  which  strive  not  in  words, 
but  in  action,  to  fight  this  specialization. 

Books  are  appearing  which  it  is  impossible  to  refer  to  any 
accepted  library  classification,  which  it  is  impossible  to  "enroll" 
in  any  faculty.  These  books  are  the  forerunners  of  a  new  liter- 
ture  which  will  break  down  all  fences  built  in  the  region  of 
thought,  and  will  clearly  show  to  humanity  where  it  is  going. 

The  names  of  the  authors  of  these  books  yield  the  most  unex- 
pected combinations.  I  shall  not  now  mention  the  names  of 
these  authors,  or  the  titles  of  these  books,  but  shall  dwell  only 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  317 

upon  the  writings  of  Edward  Carpenter  and  upon  that  American 
movement  of  thought,  little  known  in  Russia,  of  which  the 
Canadian  psychatrist,  Dr.  R.  M.  Bucke  is  a  representative. 

Edward  Carpenter,  directly  and  without  any  allegories  and  sym- 
bols, formulated  the  thought  that  the  existing  consciousness  by 
which  contemporary  man  lives,  is  merely  the  transitory  form  of 
another  higher  consciousness,  which  even  now  is  manifesting  in 
certain  men,  after  appropriate  preparation  and  training. 

This  higher  consciousness  Edward  Carpenter  names  cosmic 
consciousness. 

Carpenter  travelled  in  the  Orient,  visited  India  and  Ceylon,  and 
there  he  found  men,  yogis  and  ascetics,  striving  to  achieve  cosmic 
consciousness,  and  he  holds  the  opinion  that  the  path  to  cosmic 
consciousness  is  already  found  in  the  Orient. 

In  the  book,  "From  Adam's  Peak  to  Elephanta",  he  says: 

The  West  seeks  the  individual  consciousness — the  enriched  mind, 
ready  perceptions  and  memories,  individual  hopes  and  fears,  ambitions, 
loves,  conquests— the  self,  the  local  self,  in  all  its  phases  and  forms— and 
sorely  doubts  whether  such  a  thing  as  an  universal  consciousness  exists. 
The  East  seeks  the  universal  consciousness,  and  in  these  cases  where  its 
quest  succeeds  individual  self  and  life  thin  away  to  a  mere  film,  and  are 
only  the  shadows  cast  by  the  glory  revealed  beyond. 

The  individual  consciousness  takes  the  form  of  TJwught,  which  is  fluid 
and  mobile  like  quicksilver,  perpetually  in  a  state  of  change  and  unrest, 
fraught  with  pain  and  effort;  the  other  consciousness  is  not  in  the  form  of 
thought.  It  touches,  sees,  hears,  and  is  those  things  which  it  perceives, 
without  motion,  without  change,  without  effort,  without  distinction  of 
subject  and  object,  but  with  a  vast  and  incredible  joy. 

The  individual  consciousness  is  specially  related  to  the  body.  The 
organs  of  the  body  are  in  some  degree  its  organs.  But  the  whole  body  is 
only  as  one  organ  of  the  cosmic  consciousness.  To  attain  this  latter  one 
must  have  the  power  of  knowing  one's  self  separate  from  the  body — of 
passing  into  a  state  of  ecstasy,  in  fact.  Without  this  the  cosmic  conscious- 
ness cannot  be  experienced. 

All  the  subsequent  writings  of  Carpenter,  and  especially  his 
book  of  free  verse,  "Towards  Democracy,"  deal  with  the  psychol- 
ogy of  ecstatic  experiences  and  portray  the  path  whereby  man 
goes  toward  this  principal  aim  of  his  existence. 

Only  the  attainment  of  this  principal  aim  will  illumine  for 
man  the  past  and  the  future;  it  will  be  a  seership,  an  awakening — 
without  this,  with  only  earthly,  "individual"  consciousness,  man 


318      •  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

is  blind,  and  cannot  hope  to  know  anything  that  he  cannot  feel 
with  his  stick. 

Dr.  Bucke,  in  his  book  "Cosmic  Consciousness,"  gives  the 
psychological  view  of  this  awakening  of  the  new  consciousness. 

I  shall  give,  in  abbreviated  form,  several  quotations  from  his 
book. 

What  is  Cosmic  Consciousness? 

Cosmic  Consciousness  is  a  higher  form  of  consciousness  than  that 
possessed  by  the  ordinary  man.  This  last  is  called  Self  Consciousness 
and  is  that  faculty  upon  which  rests  all  of  our  life  (both  subjective  and 
objective)  which  is  not  common  to  us  and  the  higher  animals,  except 
that  small  part  of  it  which  is  derived  from  the  few  individuals  who  have 
had  the  higher  consciousness  above  named.  To  make  the  matter  clear 
it  must  be  understood  that  there  are  three  forms  or  grades  of  conscious- 
ness. (1)  Simple  Consciousness,  which  is  possessed  by  say  the  upper 
half  of  the  animal  kingdom.  (2)  Self-Consciousness  possessed  by  man 
in  addition  to  the  simple  consciousness,  which  is  similar  in  man  and  in 
animals.  (3)  Cosmic  Consciousness.  By  means  of  simple  consciousness 
a  dog  or  a  horse  is  just  as  conscious  of  the  things  about  him  as  a  man  is; 
he  is  also  conscious  of  his  own  limbs  and  body  and  knows  that  these  are 
a  part  of  himself.  By  virtue  of  self -consciousness  man  is  not  only  con- 
scious of  trees,  rocks,  water,  his  own  limbs  and  body,  but  he  becomes 
conscious  of  himself  as  a  distinct  entity  apart  from  all  the  rest  of  the 
universe. 

It  is  as  good  as  certain  that  no  animal  can  realize  himself  in  that 
way.  Further,  by  means  of  self -consciousness,  man  becomes  capable  of 
treating  his  own  mental  states  as  objects  of  consciousness.  The  animal 
is,  as  it  were,  immersed  in  his  consciousness  as  a  fish  in  the  sea;  he  can- 
not, even  in  imagination,  get  outside  of  it  for  one  moment  so  as  to  realize 
it.  But  man  by  virtue  of  self-consciousness  can  step  aside,  as  it  were, 
from  himself  and  think:  "  Yes,  that  thought  that  I  had  about  that  mat- 
ter is  true;  I  know  it  is  true  and  I  know  that  I  know  it  is  true."  There 
is  no  evidence  that  any  animal  can  think,  but  if  they  could  we  should 
soon  know  it.  Between  two  creatures  living  together,  as  dogs  or  horses 
and  men,  and  each  self-conscious,  it  would  be  the  simplest  matter  in 
the  world  to  open  up  communication.  We  do,  by  watching  the  dog's 
acts,  enter  into  his  mind  pretty  freely.  If  he  was  self-conscious,  we  must 
have  learned  it  long  ago.  We  have  not  learned  it  and  it  is  as  good  as 
certain  that  no  dog,  horse,  elephant  or  ape  ever  was  self-conscious. 
Another  thing:  on  man's  self-consciousness  is  built  everything  in  and 
about  us  distinctly  human.  Language  is  the  objective  of  which  self- 
consciousness  is  the  subjective.  Self-consciousness  and  language  (two 
in  one,  for  they  are  two  halves  of  the  same  thing)  are  the  sine  qua  non 
of  human  social  life,  of  manners,  of  institutions,  of  industries  of  all 
kinds,  of  all  arts  useful  and  fine.  If  any  animal  possessed  self -conscious- 
ness it  would  build  a  superstructure  of  language.     .     .     But  no  animal 


TKRTIUM  ORGANUM  319 

has  done  this,  therefore,  we  infer  that  no  animal  has  subconsciousness^ 
The  possession  of  self-consciousness  and  language  (its  other  self )  by  man 
creates  an  enormous  gap  between  him  and  the  highest  creature  possess- 
ing simple  consciousness  merely.  .  Q  „  p 

Cosmic  Consciousness  is  a  third  form,  which  is  as  far  above  Self  Con- 
sciousness as  is  that  above  Simple  Consciousness  The  prime  character- 
ise o^  consciousness  is,  as  its  name  implies,  a  consciousness  of 
the  cosmos,  that  is,  of  the  life  and  order  of  the  universe.  Along  with 
the  copiousness  of  the  cosmos  there  occurs  an  intellectual  enhghten- 
ment  or  illumination  which  alone  would  place  the  individual  on  a  new 
plane  of  existence-would  make  him  almost  a  member  of  a  new  species 
To  this  is  added  a  state  of  moral  exaltation  an  mdescribable  feeling  of 
elevation,  elation  and  joyousness,  and  a  qmckening  of  the  moral  sense, 
which  is  fully  as  striking  and  more  important  both  to  the  individual  and 
Го  the  race  than  is  the  enhanced  intellectual  power.  With  these  come 
what  may  be  called,  a  sense  of  immortality,  a  consciousness  of  eterna 
life,  not  a  conviction  that  he  shall  have  this,  but  the  consciousness  that 

heOnTy  a  p^rstnll'experience  of  it,  or  a  prolonged  study  of  men  who  have 
passed  into  the  new  life,  will  enable  us  to  realize  what  this  actually  is. 
The  writer  expects  his  work  to  be  useful  in  two  ways:    First,  in  broaden- 
ing the  general  view  of  human  life  by  comprehending  m  our  mental 
vision  this  important  phase  of  it,  then  by  enabling  us  to  realize,  in  some 
measure,  the  true  status  of  certain  men  who,  down  to  the  P^en^e 
either  exalted  to  the  ranks  of  gods  or  are  adjudged  msane.    The  writer 
takes  the  view  that  our  descendants  will  sooner  or  later  reach,  as  a  race, 
the  condition  of  cosmic  consciousness,  just  as  long  ago   ™.  ^^ 
passed  from  simple  to  self-consciousness.    He  believes  that  this  step  in 
evolution  is  even  now  being  made,  since  it  is  clear  to  him  both  that  men 
with  the  faculty  in  question  are  becoming  more  and  more  common  and 
also  that  as  a  race  we  are  approaching  nearer  and  nearer  to  that  stage 
of  the  self-conscious  mind  from  which  the  transition  to  the  cosmic  con- 
scious is  effected.    He  knows  that  intelligent  contact  with  cosmic  con- 
scious minds  assists  self-conscious  individuals  in  the  ascent  to  the  higher 
plane. 

II. 

The  immediate  future  of  our  race,  the  writer  thinks,  is  indescribably 
hopeful.  There  are  at  the  present  moment  impending  over  us  three 
revolutions,  the  least  of  which  would  dwarf  the  ordinary  historic  up- 
heaval called  by  that  name  into  absolute  insignificance.*  lhey  are:  (1) 
the  materia!,  economic  and  social  revolution  which  will  depend  upon 
and  result  from  the  establishment  of  aerial  navigation  (2)  lhe 
economic  and  social  revolution  which  will  abohsh  individual  ownership 
and  rid  the  earth  at  once  of  two  immense  evils— riches  and  poverty. 
And  (3)   The  psychical  revolution  of  which  there  is  here  question. 

Either  of  the  first  two  would  (and  will)  radically  change  the  conditions 
of,  and  greatly  uplift,  human  life;  but  the  third  will  do  more  for  human- 

♦See  the  comment  1,  p.  327. 


320  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

ity  than  both  of  the  former,  were  their  importance  multiplied  by  hun- 
dreds or  even  thousands. 

The  three  operating  (as  they  will)  together  will  literally  create  a  new 
heaven  and  a  new  earth.  Old  things  will  be  done  away  and  all  will  be- 
come new. 

Before  aerial  navigation  national  boundaries,  tariffs  and  perhaps  des- 
stinctions  of  language  will  fade  out.  Great  cities  will  no  longer  have 
reason  for  being  and  will  melt  away.  The  men  who  now  dwell  in  cities 
will  inhabit  in  summer  the  mountains  and  the  seashores;  building  often 
in  airy  and  beautiful  spots,  now  almost  or  quite  inaccessible,  command- 
ing the  most  extensive  and  magnificent  views.  In  the  winter  they  will 
probably  dwell  in  communities  of  moderate  size.  As  herding  together, 
as  now,  in  great  cities,  so  the  isolation  of  the  worker  of  the  soil  will  be- 
come a  thing  of  the  past.  Space  will  be  practically  annihilated,  there  will 
be  no  crowding  together  and  no  enforced  solitude. 

Before  socialism  crushing  toil,  cruel  anxiety,  insulting  and  demoral- 
izing riches,  poverty  and  its  ills  will  become  subjects  for  historical  novels.* 


In  contact  with  the  flux  of  cosmic  consciousness  all  religions  known 
and  named  today  will  be  melted  down.  The  human  soul  will  be  revo- 
lutionized. Religion  will  absolutely  dominate  the  race.  It  will  not  de- 
pend on  traditions.  It  will  not  be  believed  and  disbelieved.  It  will  be 
part  of  life,  not  belonging  to  certain  hours,  times,  occasions.  It  will  not 
be  in  sacred  books,  nor  in  the  mouths  of  priests.  It  will  not  dwell  in 
churches  and  meetings  and  forms  and  days.  Its  life  will  not  be  in  pray- 
ers, hymns  nor  discourses.  It  will  not  depend  on  special  revelations,  on 
the  words  of  gods  who  came  down  to  teach,  nor  on  any  bible  or  bibles.  It 
will  have  no  mission  to  save  men  from  their  sins  or  to  secure  their  en- 
trance to  heaven.  It  will  not  teach  a  future  immortality  nor  future 
glories,  for  immortality  and  all  glory  will  exist  in  the  here  and  now.  The 
evidence  of  immortality  will  live  in  every  heart  as  sight  in  every  eye. 
Doubt  of  God  and  of  eternal  fife  will  be  as  impossible  as  is  now  doubt  of 
existence;  the  evidence  of  each  will  be  the  same.  Religion  will  govern 
every  minute  of  every  day  of  all  life.  Churches,  priests,  forms,  creeds, 
prayers,  all  agents,  all  intermediaries  between  the  individual  man  and 
God  will  be  permanently  replaced  by  direct  unmistakable  intercourse. 
Sin  will  no  longer  exist  nor  will  salvation  be  desired.  Men  will  not  worry 
about  death  or  a  future,  about  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  about  what  may 
come  with  and  after  the  cessation  of  the  life  of  the  present  body. 
Each  soul  will  feel  and  know  itself  to  be  immortal,  will  feel  and  know 
that  the  entire  universe  with  all  its  good  and  with  all  its  beauty  is  for 
it  and  belongs  to  it  forever.  The  world  peopled  by  men  possessing  cosmic 
consciousness  will  be  as  far  removed  from  the  world  of  today  as  this  is 
from  the  world  as  it  was  before  the  advent  of  self  consciousness. 

III. 

There  is  a  tradition,  probably  very  old,  to  the  effect  that  the  first  man 
was  innocent  and  happy  until  he  ate  of  the  fruit  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge 

♦See  the  oomment  2,  p.  328. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  321 

of  good  and  evil.  That  having  eaten  thereof  he  became  aware  that  he 
was  naked  and  was  ashamed.  Further,  that  there  sin  was  born  into  the 
world,  the  miserable  sense  whereof  replaced  man's  former  feeling  of  inno- 
cency.  That  then  and  not  till  then  man  began  to  labor  and  to  cover  his 
body.  Stranger  than  all,  the  story  runs,  that  along  with  this  change  or 
immediately  following  upon  it  there  came  into  man's  mind  the  re- 
markable conviction  which  has  never  since  left  it,  but  which  has  been 
kept  alive  by  its  own  inherent  vitality  and  by  the  teaching  of  all  true 
seers,  prophets  and  poets  that  man  will  be  saved  by  the  rising  up  within 
him  of  a  Savior — the  Christ. 

Man's  progenitor  was  a  creature  with  simple  consciousness 
merely.  He  was  (as  are  today  the  animals)  incapable  of  sin  and  equally 
incapable  of  shame  (at  least  in  the  human  sense).  He  had  no  feeling  or 
knowledge  of  good  and  evil.  He  as  yet  knew  nothing  of  what  we  call 
work  and  had  never  labored.  From  this  state  he  fell  (or  rose)  into  self- 
consciousness,  his  eyes  were  opened,  he  knew  he  was  naked,  he  felt 
shame,  acquired  the  sense  of  sin  (became  in  fact  what  is  called  a  sinner) 
and  learned  to  do  certain  things  in  order  to  encompass  certain  ends — 
that  is,  he  learned  to  labor. 

For  weary  eons  this  condition  has  lasted — the  sense  of  sin  still  haunts 
his  pathway— by  the  sweat  of  his  brow  he  still  eats  bread— he  is  still 
ashamed.    Where  is  the  deliverer,  the  Savior?    Who  or  what? 

The  Savior  of  man  is  Cosmic  Consciousness— in  Paul's  language — the 
Christ.  The  cosmic  sense  (in  whatever  mind  it  appears)  crushes  the 
serpent's  head — destroys  sin,  shame,  the  sense  of  good  and  evil,  as  con- 
trasted one  with  the  other,  and  will  annihilate  labor,  though  not  human 
activity. 

rv. 

A  personal  exposition  of  the  writer's  own  experience  of  cosmic  con- 
sciousness may  help  the  reader  to  understand  the  meaning  of  the  follow- 
ing facts: 

In  childhood  he  was  subject  at  times  to  a  sort  of  ecstasy  of  curiosity 
and  hope.  As  on  one  special  occasion  when  about  ten  years  old  he  earn- 
estly longed  to  die  that  the  secrets  of  the  beyond,  if  there  was  any  be- 
yond, might  be  revealed  to  him.     .     . 

At  the  age  of  thirty  he  fell  in  with  "Leaves  of  Grass,"  and  at  once 
saw  that  it  contained,  in  greater  measure  than  any  book  so  far  found, 
what  he  had  so  long  been  looking  for.  He  read  the  "Leaves"  eagerly, 
even  passionately,  but  for  several  years  derived  little  from  them.  At 
last  light  broke  and  there  was  revealed  to  him  (as  far  perhaps  as  such 
things  can  be  revealed)  at  least  some  of  the  meanings.  Then  occurred 
that  to  which  the  foregoing  is  the  preface. 

It  was  in  the  early  spring,  at  the  beginning  of  his  thirty-sixth  year. 
He  and  two  friends  had  spent  the  evening  reading  Wordsworth,  Shelley, 
Keats,  Browning,  and  especially  Whitman.  They  parted  at  midnight 
and  he  had  a  long  drive  in  a  hansom  (it  was  in  an  English  city).  His 
mind,  deeply  under  the  influence  of  the  ideas,  images  and  emotions 


322  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

called  up  by  the  reading  and  talk  of  the  evening,  was  calm  and  peaceful. 
He  was  in  a  state  of  quiet,  almost  passive  enjoyment.  All  at  once,  with- 
out warning  of  any  kind,  he  found  himself  wrapped  around  as  it  were  by  a 
flame-colored  cloud.  For  an  instant  he  thought  of  fire,  some  sudden 
conflagration  in  the  great  city;  the  next  he  knew  the  light  was  within 
himself.  Directly  afterwards  came  upon  him  a  sense  of  exultation,  of 
immense  joyousness  accompanied  or  immediately  followed  by  an 
intellectual  illumination  quite  impossible  to  describe.  Into  his  brain 
streamed  one  momentary  lightning-flash  of  the  Brahmic  splendor  which 
has  ever  since  lightened  his  life;  upon  his  heart  fell  one  drop  of  Brahmic 
Bliss,  leaving  thenceforward  for  always  an  after  taste  of  heaven.  Among 
other  things  he  did  not  come  to  believe,  he  saw  and  knew  that  the  cosmos 
is  not  dead  matter  but  a  living  Presence,  that  the  soul  of  man  is  immortal, 
that  the  universe  is  so  built  and  ordered  that  without  peradventure  all 
things  work  together  for  the  good  of  each  and  all,  that  the  foundation 
principle  of  the  world  is  what  we  call  love  and  that  the  happiness  of 
every  one  in  the  long  run  is  absolutely  certain.  He  claims  he  learned 
more  within  the  few  seconds  during  which  the  illumination  lasted  than  in 
previous  months  or  even  years  of  study  and  that  he  learned  much  that 
no  study  could  ever  have  taught. 

The  illumination  itself  continued  not  more  than  a  few  moments,  but 
its  effects  proved  ineffaceable;  it  was  impossible  for  him  ever  to  forget 
what  he  at  that  time  saw  and  knew;  neither  did  he,  or  could  he,  ever 
doubt  the  truth  of  what  was  then  presented  to  his  mind.  There  was  no 
return  that  night  or  at  any  other  time  of  the  experience. 

The  supreme  occurrence  of  that  night  was  his  real  and  sole  initiation 
to  the  new  and  higher  order  of  ideas.  But  it  was  only  an  initiation.  He 
saw  the  light  but  had  no  more  idea  whence  it  came  and  what  it  meant 
than  had  the  first  creature  that  saw  the  light  of  the  sun.  Years  after- 
wards he  met  a  man  who  had  had  a  large  experience  in  the  higher  life. 
His  conversations  with  this  man  threw  a  flood  of  light  upon  the  mean- 
ing of  what  he  had  himself  experienced. 

Looking  round  then  upon  the  world  of  man,  he  saw  the  significance 
of  the  subjective  light  in  the  case  of  Paul  and  in  that  of  Mohammed. 
The  secret  of  Whitman's  transcendent  greatness  was  revealed  to  him. 
Personal  intercourse  and  conversations  with  men,*  who  had  similar 
experiences  assisted  greatly  in  the  broadening  and  clearing  up  of  his 
speculations. 

After  spending  much  time  and  labor  in  thinking  he  came  to  the 
conclusion  that  there  exists  a  family  sprung  from,  living  among,  but 
scarcely  forming  a  part  of  ordinary  humanity,  whose  members  are  spread 
abroad  throughout  the  advanced  races  of  mankind  and  throughout  the 
last  forty  centuries  of  the  world's  history. 

The  trait  that  distinguishes  these  people  from  other  men  is  this: 
Their  spiritual  eyes  have  been  opened  and  they  have  seen.  The  better 
known  members  of  this  group  who,  if  they  were  collected  together,  could 
be  accommodated  all  at  one  time  in  a  modern  drawing-room,  have 
created  all  the  great  modern  religions,  beginning  with  Taoism  and 

♦Among  whom  was  Edward  Carpenter. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  323 

Buddhism,  and  speaking  generally,  have  created,  through  religion  and 
literature,  modern  civilization.  Not  that  they  have  contributed  any 
large  numerical  proportion  of  the  books  which  have  been  written,  but  that 
they  have  produced  the  few  books  which  have  inspired  the  larger  number 
of  all  that  have  been  written  in  modern  times.  These  men  dominate  the 
last  twenty-five,  especially  the  last  five  centuries  as  stars  of  the  first 
magnitude  dominate  the  midnight  sky. 


It  remains  to  say  a  few  words  upon  the  psychological  origin  of  what 
is  called  in  this  book  Cosmic  Consciousness. 

Although  in  the  birth  of  Cosmic  Consciousness  the  moral  nature  plays 
an  important  part,  it  will  be  better  for  many  reasons  to  confine  our  at- 
tention at  present  to  the  evolution  of  the  intellect.  In  this  evolution 
there  are  four  distinct  steps.  The  first  of  them  was  taken  when  upon 
the  primary  quality  of  excitability  sensation  was  established.  At  this 
point  began  the  acquisition  and  more  or  less  perfect  registration  of  sense 
impressions — that  is,  of  percepts.  A  percept  is  of  course  a  sense  impres- 
sion. If  we  could  go  back  far  enough  we  should  find  among  our  ancestors 
a  creature  whose  whole  intellect  was  made  up  simply  of  these  percepts. 
But  this  creature  had  in  it  what  may  be  called  an  eligibility  of  growth, 
and  what  happened  with  it  was  something  like  this :  Individually  and 
from  generation  to  generation  it  accumulated  these  percepts,  the  con- 
stant repetition  of  which,  calling  for  further  and  further  registration, 
led,  in  the  struggle  for  existence  and  under  the  law  of  natural  selection, 
to  an  accumulation,  of  cells  in  the  central  sense  ganglia;  at  last  a  condi- 
tion was  reached  in  which  it  became  possible  for  our  ancestor  to  combine 
groups  of  these  percepts  into  what  we  today  call  a  recept.  This  process 
is  very  similar  to  that  of  composite  photography.  Similar  percepts  (as 
of  a  tree)  are  registered  one  over  the  other  until  they  are  generalized 
into  the  percept  of  a  tree. 

Now  the  work  of  accumulation  begins  again  on  a  higher  plane:  the 
sensory  organs  keep  steadily  at  work  manufacturing  percepts;  the  re- 
ceptual  centers  keep  steadily  at  work  manufacturing  more  and  yet  more 
recepts  from  the  old  and  the  new  percepts;  the  capacity  of  the  central 
ganglia  are  constantly  taxed  to  do  necessary  registration  of  percepts, 
the  necessary  elaboration  of  these  into  recepts;  then  as  the  ganglia  by  use 
and  selection  are  improved  they  constantly  manufacture  from  percepts 
and  from  the  initial  simple  recepts,  more  and  more  complex,  that  is, 
higher  and  higher  recepts. 

At  last,  after  many  thousands  of  generations  have  lived  and  died, 
comes  a  time  when  the  mind  has  reached  the  highest  possible  point  of 
purely  receptual  intelligence;  the  accumulation  of  percepts  and  of  re- 
cepts has  gone  on  until  no  greater  stores  of  impressions  can  be  laid  up 
and  no  further  elaboration  of  these  can  be  accomplished  on  the  plane  of 
receptual  intelligence.  Then  another  break  is  made  and  the  higher  re- 
cepts are  replaced  by  concepts.    The  relation  of  a  concept  to  a  recept  is 


324  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

somewhat  similar  to  the  relation  of  algebra  to  arithmetic.  A  recept  is  a 
composite  image  of  hundreds,  perhaps  thousands  of  percepts;  it  is 
itself  an  image  abstracted  from  many  images;  but  a  concept  is  that  same 
composite  image — that  same  recept — named,  ticketed,  and,  as  it  were, 
dismissed.  A  concept  is  in  fact  neither  more  or  less  than  a  named 
recept — the  name  that  is,  the  sign  (as  in  algebra),  standing  henceforth 
for  the  thing  itself,  that  is,  for  the  recept. 

Now  it  is  clear  as  day  to  any  one  who  will  give  the  least  thought  to 
the  subject,  that  the  revolution  by  which  concepts  are  substituted  for 
recepts  increases  the  efficiency  of  the  brain  for  thought  as  much  as  the 
introduction  of  machinery  increased  the  capacity  of  the  race  for  work — 
as  much  as  the  use  of  algebra  increases  the  power  of  the  mind  in  mathe- 
matical calculations.  To  replace  a  great  cumbersome  recept  by  a  simple 
sign  was  almost  like  replacing  actual  goods — as  wheat,  fabrics  and  hard- 
ware— by  entries  in  the  ledger. 

But,  as  hinted  above,  in  order  that  a  recept  may  be  replaced  by  a  con- 
cept it  must  be  named,  or,  in  other  words,  marked  with  a  sign  which 
stands  for  it — just  as  a  check  stands  for  a  piece  of  goods;  in  other  words, 
the  race  that  is  in  possession  of  concepts  is  also,  and  necessarily,  in 
possession  of  language.  Further,  it  should  be  noted,  as  the  possession 
of  concepts  implies  the  possession  of  language,  so  the  possession  of  con- 
cepts and  language  (which  are  in  reality  two  aspects  of  the  same  thing) 
implies  the  possession  of  self  consciousness.  All  this  means  that  there  is 
a  moment  in  the  evolution  of  mind  when  the  receptual  intellect,  capable 
of  simple  consciousness  only,  becomes  almost  or  quite  instantaneously  a 
conceptual  intellect  in  possession  of  language  and  self  consciousness. 

Our  intellect,  then,  today  is  made  up  of  a  very  complex  mixture  of 
percepts,  recepts  and  concepts. 

The  next  chapter  in  the  story  is  the  accumulation  of  concepts.  This 
is  a  double  process,  each  individual  accumulates  a  larger  and  larger 
number  while  the  individual  concepts  are  becoming  constantly  more  and 
more  complex. 

Is  there  to  be  any  limit  to  this  growth  of  concepts  in  number  and  com- 
plexity? Whoever  will  seriously  consider  that  question  will  see  that  there 
must  be  a  limit.    No  such  process  could  go  on  to  infinity. 

We  have  seen  that  the  expansion  of  the  perceptual  mind  had  a  neces- 
sary limit;  that  its  continued  life  led  inevitably  up  to  and  into  the  re- 
ceptual mind.  That  the  receptual  mind  by  its  own  growth  was  inevit- 
ably led  up  to  and  into  the  conceptual  mind.  A  priori  considerations 
make  it  certain  that  a  corresponding  outlet  will  be  found  for  the  con- 
ceptual mind. 

But  we  do  not  need  to  depend  upon  abstract  reasoning  to  demonstrate 
the  necessary  existence  of  the  supra  conceptual  mind,  since  it  exists  and 
can  be  studied  with  no  more  difficulty  than  other  natural  phenomena. 
The  supra  conceptual  intellect  the  elements  of  which  instead  of  being 
concepts  are  intuitions,  is  already  (in  small  numbers  it  is  true)  an  estab- 
lished fact,  and  the  form  of  consciousness  that  belongs  to  that  intellect 
may  be  called  and  has  been  called — Cosmic  Consciousness. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  325 

The  basic  fact  in  cosmic  consciousness  is  implied  in  its  name — that 
fact  is  consciousness  of  the  cosmos — this  is  what  is  called  in  the  East  the 
"Brahmic  Splendor,"  which  is  in  Dante's  phrase  capable  of  transhuman- 
izing  a  man  into  a  god.  Whitman,  who  has  an  immense  deal  to  say  about 
it,  speaks  of  it  in  one  place  as  "ineffable  light— light  rare,  untenable, 
lighting  the  very  light— beyond  all  signs,  description,  languages."  This 
consciousness  shows  the  cosmos  to  consist  not  of  dead  matter  governed 
by  unconscious,  rigid,  and  unintending  law;  it  shows  it  on  the  contrary 
as  entirely  immaterial,  entirely  spiritual  and  entirely  alive;  it  shows  that 
death  is  an  absurdity,  that  everyone  and  everything  has  eternal  life;  it 
shows  that  the  universe  is  God  and  that  God  is  the  universe  ...  A 
great  deal  of  this  is,  of  course,  from  the  point  of  view  of  self -conscious- 
ness, absurd;  it  is  nevertheless  undoubtedly  true.  Now  all  this  does  not 
mean  that  when  a  man  has  cosmic  consciousness  he  knows  everything 
about  the  universe.  We  all  know  that  when  at  three  years  of  age  we 
acquired  self -consciousness,  we  did  not  at  once  know  all  about  our- 
selves. .  .  So  neither  does  a  man  know  all  about  the  cosmos  merely 
because  he  becomes  conscious  of  it.     .     . 

If  it  has  taken  the  race  several  thousand  years  to  learn  a  smattering 
of  the  science  of  humanity  since  its  acquisition  of  self  consciousness,  so 
it  may  take  it  millions  of  years  to  acquire  cosmic  consciousness. 

As  on  self -consciousness  is  based  the  human  world  as  we  see  it  with  all 
its  works  and  ways,  so  on  cosmic  consciousness  is  based  the  higher  re- 
ligions and  the  higher  philosophies  and  what  comes  from  them,  and  on 
it  will  be  based,  when  it  becomes  more  general,  a  new  world  of  which  it 
would  be  idle  to  try  to  speak  today.  m 

The  philosophy  of  the  birth  of  cosmic  consciousness  in  the  individual 
is  very  similar  to  that  of  the  birth  of  self -consciousness.  The  mind 
becomes  overcrowded  (as  it  were)  with  concepts  and  these  are  con- 
stantly becoming  larger,  more  numerous  and  more  and  more  complex; 
some  day  (the  conditions  being  all  favorable)  the  fusion,  or  what  might 
be  called  the  chemical  union,  of  several  of  them  and  of  certain  moral  ele- 
ments takes  place;  the  result  is  an  intuition  and  the  establishment  of  the 
intuitional  mind,  or,  in  other  words,  cosmic  consciousness.* 

The  scheme  by  which  the  mind  is  built  up  is  uniform  from  beginning 
to  end:  a  recept  is  made  of  many  percepts;  a  concept  of  many  or  several 
recepts  and  percepts,  and  an  intuition  is  made  of  many  concepts,  recepts 
and  percepts  together  with  other  elements  belonging  to  and  drawn  from 
the  moral  nature.  The  cosmic  vision  or  the  cosmic  intuition,  from  which 
what  may  be  called  the  new  mind  takes  its  name,  is  thus  seen  to  be 
simply  the  complex  and  union  of  all  prior  thought  and  experience — just 
as  self -consciousness  is  the  complex  and  union  of  all  thought  and  experi- 
ence prior  to  it.  

Cosmic  consciousness,  like  other  forms  of  consciousness,  is  capable  of 
growth,  it  may  have  different  forms,  different  degrees. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  because  a  man  has  cosmic  consciousness 
he  is  therefore  omniscient  or  infallible.     Men  of  cosmic  consciousness 

♦See  the  comment  3,  p.  329. 


326  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

have  reached  a  higher  level;  but  on  that  level  there  can  be  different  de- 
grees of  consciousness.  And  it  must  still  be  more  evident  that,  however 
godlike  the  faculty  may  be,  those  who  first  acquire  it,  living  in  diverse 
ages  and  countries  passing  their  life  in  different  surroundings,  brought 
up  to  view  life  and  the  interests  of  life  from  totally  different  points  of 
view,  must  necessarily  interpret  somewhat  differently  those  things 
which  they  see  in  the  newjworld  which  they  enter. 


Language  corresponds  to  the  intellect  and  is  therefore  capable  of  ex- 
pressing it  perfectly  and  directly;  on  the  other  hand,  the  functions  of  the 
moral  nature  are  not  connected  with  language  and  are  only  capable  of 
indirect  and  imperfect  expression  by  its  agency.  Perhaps  music,  which 
certainly  has  its  roots  in  the  moral  nature,  is,  as  at  present  existing, 
the  beginning  of  a  language  which  will  tally  and  express  emotions  as 
words  tally  and  express  ideas.     .     . 

Language  is  the  exact  tally  of  the  intellect;  for  every  concept  there  is 
a  word  or  words  and  for  every  word  there  is  a  concept.  .  .  No  word 
can  come  into  being  except  as  the  expression  of  a  concept,  neither  can  a 
new  concept  be  formed  without  the  formation  (at  the  same  time)  of  the 
new  word  which  is  its  expression.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact  ninety-nine 
out  of  every  hundred  of  our  sense  impressions  and  emotions  have  never 
been  represented  in  the  intellect  by  concepts  and  therefore  remain  un- 
expressed and  inexpressible  except  by  roundabout  description  and  sug- 
gestion. 

As  the  correspondence  of  words  and  concepts  is  not  casual  or  tem- 
porary but  resides  in  the  nature  of  these  and  continues  during  all  time 
and  under  all  circumstances  absolutely  constant,  so  changes  in  one  of 
the  factors  must  correspond  with  changes  in  the  other.  So  evolution  of 
intellect  must  be  accompanied  by  evolution  of  language.  An  evolution 
of  language  will  be  evidence  of  evolution  of  intellect. 


It  seems  that  in  every,  or  nearly  every  man  who  enters  into  cosmic 
consciousness  apprehension  is  at  first  more  or  less  excited,  the  person 
doubting  whether  the  new  sense  may  not  be  a  symptom  or  form  of  insan- 
ity. Mohammed  was  greatly  alarmed.  The  Apostle  Paul  was  alarmed 
in  the  same  manner. 

The  first  thing  each  person  asks  himself  upon  experiencing  the  new 
sense  is:  Does  what  I  see  and  feel  represent  reality  or  am  I  suffering 
from  a  delusion?  The  fact  that  the  new  experience  seems  even  more  real 
than  the  old  teachings  of  consciousness  does  not  at  first  fully  reassure 
him,  because  he  knows  the  force  of  delusions. 

Simultaneously  or  instantly  following  the  above  sense  and  emotional 
experiences  there  comes  to  the  person  an  intellectual  illumination  quite 
impossible  to  describe.  Like  a  flash  there  is  presented  to  his  conscious- 
ness a  clear  conception  (a  vision)  in  outline  of  the  meaning  and  drift  of 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  327 

the  universe.  He  does  not  come  to  believe  merely;  but  he  sees  and 
knows  that  the  cosmos,  which  to  the  self-conscious  mind  seems  made  up 
of  dead  matter,  is  in  fact  far  otherwise — is  in  very  truth  a  living  presence. 
He  sees  that  instead  of  men  being,  as  it  were,  patches  of  life  scattered 
through  an  infinite  sea  of  non-living  substance,  they  are  in  reality  specks 
of  relative  death  in  an  infinite  ocean  of  life.  He  sees  that  the  life  which 
is  in  man  is  eternal,  as  all  life  is  eternal,  that  the  soul  of  man  is  as 
immortal  as  God  is.     . 

A  man  learns  infinitely  much  of  the  new.  Especially  does  he  obtain 
such  a  conception  of  THE  WHOLE  or  at  least  of  an  immense  WHOLE, 
as  dwarfs  all  conception,  imagination  or  speculation,  such  a  conception 
as  makes  the  old  attempts  to  mentally  grasp  the  universe  and  its  mean- 
ing petty  and  even  ridiculous. 

This  expansion  of  the  intellect  enormously  increases  the  capacity  both 
for  learning  and  initiating. 


The  history  of  the  development  and  appearance  of  cosmic  conscious- 
ness in  humanity  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  development  of  all  the  various 
psychic  faculties.  These  faculties  appear  first  in  certain  exceptional 
individuals,  then  become  more  frequent,  thereafter  become  susceptible 
of  development  in  all,  and  at  last  begin  to  belong  to  all  men  from  their 
birth.  Rare,  exceptional,  unique  abilities  appear  in  man  in  mature  age, 
sometimes  even  in  senility.  Becoming  more  common  they  manifest  as 
"talents"  in  younger  men.  And  then  they  appear  as  "abilities"  even  in 
children.  At  last  they  become  the  common  property  of  all  from  their 
birth,  and  their  absence  is  regarded  as  a  monstrosity. 

Such  is  the  faculty  of  speech  (i.  е.,  the  faculty  of  making  concepts). 
Probably  in  a  distant  past,  at  the  beginning  of  the  appearance  of  self- 
consciousness,  this  faculty  was  the  gift  of  a  few,  exceptional  individuals 
and  it  began  then  to  appear  perhaps  in  senility.  After  that  it  began  to 
appear  more  frequently  and  to  manifest  itself  earlier.  Probably  there 
was  a  period  when  speech  was  not  a  gift  of  all  men  just  as  are  not  now 
artistic  talents,  the  musical  sense,  the  sense  of  color  and  form.  Grad- 
ually it  became  possible  for  all  and  then  inevitable  and  necessary,  if  some 
physical  defect  did  not  prevent  its  manifestation. 


COMMENTS  ON  THE  QUOTATIONS  FROM 
DR.  BUCKE'S  BOOK 

1.  Though  I  am  quoting  this  opinion  regarding  three  coming 
revolutions,  let  me  note  that  I  do  not  at  all  share  Dr.  Bucke's 
optimism  regarding  the  material  life,  which,  as  follows  from  what 
he  says,  can  and  must  change  by  reason  of  material  causes  (the 
conquest  of  the  air  and  social  revolution).     In  my  opinion  the 


328  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

only  possible  ground  for  favorable  changes  in  the  outer  life  (pro- 
vided such  changes  are  generally  possible)  must  be  changes  in  the 
inner  life — i.  е.,  those  changes  which  Dr.  Bucke  calls  the  phychical 
revolution.  This  is  the  only  thing  that  can  create  a  better  future 
for  men.  All  cultural  conquests  in  the  realm  of  the  material  are 
double-edged,  may  equally  serve  for  good  or  for  evil.  A  change  of 
consciousness  can  alone  be  a  guarantee  of  the  surcease  of  willful 
misuses  of  the  powers  given  by  culture,  and  only  thus  will  culture 
cease  to  be  a  "growth  of  barbarity."  Democratic  organization 
and  the  rule  of  the  majority  (because  of  the  present  low  level  of 
human  development)  guarantee  nothing:  on  the  contrary,  even 
now,  where  they  are  realized,  they  create  without  delay,  and 
promise  in  future  to  create  on  a  larger  scale,  violence  toward  the 
minority,  the  limitation  of  the  individual,  and  the  curtailment  of 
freedom. 

2.  Dr.  Bucke  says  that  once  human  consciousness  is  attained, 
then  further  evolution  is  inevitable.  In  this  affirmation  Dr. 
Bucke  makes  a  mistake  common  to  all  men  who  dogmatize  about 
evolution.  Having  painted  a  very  true  picture  of  the  consecutive 
gradations  of  the  forms  of  consciousness  observed  by  us — of 
animal-vegetable,  of  animal,  and  of  man — Dr.  Bucke  considers 
this  gradation  exclusively  in  the  light  of  the  evolution  of  one 
form  from  another,  not  at  all  admitting  the  possibility  of  other 
points  of  view:  for  example,  the  fact  that  each  of  the  existing  forms 
is  a  link  of  separate  evolutionary  chains,  i.  е.,  that  the  evolutions  of 
animal-vegetables,  of  animals  and  of  men  are  different,  go  by 
different  routes,  and  do  not  impinge  upon  one  another.  And  this 
standpoint  is  entirely  justifiable  when  we  take  into  consideration 
the  fact  that  we  never  know  transitional  forms.  Moreover  Dr. 
Bucke  makes  an  entirely  arbitrary  conclusion  concerning  the 
inevitability  of  the  further  evolution  of  man,  because  unconscious 
evolution  (i.  е.,  unconscious  for  the  individual  directed  by  the 
consciousness  of  the  species)  in  the  vegetable  and  animal  kingdom 
must  change  greatly  with  the  appearance  of  self-consciousness  in 
man.  It  is  necessary  to  recognize  that  the  self-conscious  mind 
of  man  depends  upon  itself  to  a  considerably  greater  degree  than 
the  mind  which  is  not  self-conscious,  i.  е.,  the  mind  of  an  animal, 
and  depends  considerably  less  upon  the  laws  of  evolution  (even 
if  we  shall  accept  them).  The  self-conscious  mind  has  far  more 
power  over  itself;  it  can  assist  in  its  own  evolution  greatly,  and 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  329 

can  also  easily  impede  it.  We  are  confronted  with  the  general 
question :  can  unconscious  evolution  proceed  with  the  appearance 
of  self -consciousness?  It  is  far  more  correct  to  suppose  that  the 
appearance  of  self-consciousness  annihilates  the  possibility  of 
unconscious  evolution.  Power  over  evolution  passes  from  the 
group-soul  (or  from  nature)  to  the  individual  itself.  Further  evo- 
lution, if  it  take  place,  cannot  be  an  elemental  and  unconscious 
affair,  but  will  result  solely  from  conscious  efforts  toward  growth* 
This  is  the  most  interesting  point  in  the  whole  process,  but  Dr. 
В  иске  fails  to  bring  it  out.  Man,  not  striving  toward  evolution, 
not  conscious  of  its  possibility,  not  helping  it,  will  not  evolve. 
And  the  individual  who  is  not  evolving  does  not  remain  in  a  static 
condition,  but  goes  down,  degenerates  .(i.  е.,  some  of  his  elements 
begin  their  own  evolution,  inimical  to  the  whole).  This  is  the 
general  law.  And  if  we  take  into  consideration  what  an  infinitesi- 
mal percentage  of  men  think  and  are  capable  of  thinking  of  their 
evolution  (or  their  emotional  striving  toward  higher  things)  then 
we  shall  see  that  to  talk  about  the  inevitability  of  this  evolution  is 
at  least  naive. 

3.  Speaking  of  the  formation  of  intuition,  Dr.  Виске  fails  to 
take  into  consideration  one  very  important  circumstance.  He 
himself  previously  remarks  that  the  blending  of  concepts  with 
moral  elements  proceeds  in  the  mind,  and  as  a  result  of  this  intui- 
tion appears,  and  then  cosmic  consciousness.  Thus  it  follows  from 
his  own  words  that  intuition  or  cosmic  consciousness  is  not  simply 
a  blending  of  concepts  with  moral  elements,  or  ideas  with  feelings, 
but  is  the  result  of  this  blending.  Dr.  Buck  however  does  not 
dwell  on  this  with  sufficient  attention.  Moreover  he  further  re- 
gards intuition  (i.  е.,  the  fundamental  element  of  cosmic  con- 
sciousness) as  the  blending  of  sensation,  perception,  and  con- 
cepts with  elements  properly  belonging  to  the  moral  nature.  This 
is  a  mistake,  because  intuition  is  not  simply  the  blending  of 
thought  and  feeling,  but  the  result  of  this  blending,  or  in  other 
words:  thought  and  feeling  plus  something  else,  plus  something 
else  that  is  absent  either  in  the  intellect  or  in  the  emotional  nature. 

This  is  expressed  objectively  in  the  fact  that  intuition  acts  not 
through  the  brain  and  the  nervous  centers,  but  above  them  as  it 
were.  This  would  be  proven  could  "clairvoyance,"  described  so 
often,  be  proven.  Subjectively  it  is  expressed  in  the  sense  of  the  wond- 
rous, i.  е.,  an  unusual  elevation  and  expansion  of  consciousness, 

♦See  p.  298  quotation  from  Mabel  Collins'  book. 


330  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

and  in  the  process  of  the  real  knowing  of  that  which  man  did  not  know 
before,  in  the  finding  of  new  paths  to  knowledge,  as  in  regions  en- 
tirely inaccessible  before  (in  the  future,  for  example),  and  even 
in  things  which  seemed  quite  well  and  familiarly  known,  yet 
which  in  the  light  of  intuition  unfold  much  which  is  infinitely  new 
and  unexpected. 

But  Dr.  Bucke  regards  intuition  as  a  product  of  brain  evolution, 
and  this  vitiates  all  his  deductions  greatly.  Let  us  imagine  that 
some  scientist  from  another  planet,  not  suspecting  the  existence 
of  man,  studies  the  horse,  and  its  "evolution"  from  colt  to  saddle 
horse,  and  regards  as  its  highest  evolution  the  horse  with  the 
horseman  in  the  saddle.  From  our  standpoint  it  is  clearly  im- 
possible to  regard  a  man  sitting  in  the  horse's  saddle  as  a  fact  of 
horse  evolution,  but  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  scientist  who 
knows  nothing  about  man,  this  will  be  only  logical.  Dr.  Bucke 
finds  himself  in  exactly  this  position  when  he  regards  that  which 
transcends  the  region  of  humanity  altogether  as  a  fact  of  human 
evolution.  Man  possessing  cosmic  consciousness,  or  approaching 
cosmic  consciousness  is  not  merely  man,  but  man  with  something 
higher  added.  Dr.  Bucke,  like  Edward  Carpenter  in  many  cases 
also,  is  handicapped  by  the  desire  not  to  go  too  strongly  counter 
to  positivistic  views  (although  that  is  inevitable) ;  by  the  desire  to 
reconcile  those  views  with  the  "new  thought,"  to  flatten  out  con- 
tradictions, to  reduce  everything  to  one  thing,  which  is  of  course 
impossible — as  is  the  reconciliation  of  correct  and  incorrect,  true 
and  false  views  upon  one  and  the  same  thing. 


The  greater  part  of  Dr.  Bucke's  book  consists  of  examples  and 
quotations  from  the  teachings  and  writings  of  men  of  "cosmic 
consciousness"  in  the  history  of  the  world.  He  draws  parallels 
between  these  teachings,  and  establishes  the  unity  of  the  forms  of 
transition  into  the  new  state  of  consciousness  in  men  of  different 
centuries  and  of  different  peoples,  and  the  unity  of  their  sensations 
of  the  world  and  of  the  self,  testifying  more  than  anything  else  to 
the  genuineness  and  reality  of  their  experiences. 

The  founders  of  world-religions,  prophets,  philosophers,  poets — 
these  are  men  of  "cosmic  consciousness"  according  to  Dr.  Bucke's 
book.  He  does  not  pretend  to  present  a  full  list  of  them,  and  it 
is  of  course  possible  to  add  many  names  to  his  list. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  331 

But  after  all,  various  little  imperfections  of  Dr.  Bucke's  book 
are  not  important,  nor  additions  which  might  possibly  be  made. 
What  is  important  is  the  general  conclusion  to  which  Dr.  Bucke 
comes — the  possibility  and  the  immanence  of  the  new  con- 
sciousness. 

All  this  announces  to  us  the  nearness  of  the  new  humanity. 
We  are  building  without  taking  into  consideration  the  fact  that 
a  new  master  must  come  who  may  not  at  all  like  everything  that 
we  have  built.  Our  "  social  sciences,"  sociology,  and  so  forth  have 
in  view  only  man,  while  as  I  have  several  times  shown  before, 
the  concept  "man"  is  a  complex  one,  and  includes  in  itself  two 
types  going  along  different  paths.  The  future  belongs  not  to 
man,  but  to  superman,  who  is  already  born,  and  lives  among  us.  ^ 

A  higher  race  is  rapidly  emerging  among  humanity,  and  it  is 
emerging  by  reason  of  its  quite  remarkable  understanding  of  the 
world  and  of  life.  The  sign  of  the  men  of  this  new  race  is  a  new 
consciousness,  a  new  conscience.  We  shall  know  them  be- 
cause they  will  be  conscious  of  more  things,  they  will  see  more  and 
know  more  than  the  ordinary  man.  They  will  not  be  able  to 
close  their  eyes  to  what  they  see,  and  therefore  will  be  able  to  see 
farther;  they  will  not  be  able  not  to  think  about  what  they  know, 
and  therefore  will  know  more;  they  will  not  be  able  to  absolve 
themselves,  and  therefore  will  be  more  conscientious.  These  men 
will  always  see  clearly  their  responsibility  for  that  which  they  do, 
and  will  be  unable  to  put  this  responsibility  upon  others.  They 
will  not  be  satisfied  with  a  simple  discharge  of  "duty"  and  will 
feel  themselves  obliged  to  know  first  before  they  do  anything. 
They  will  not  be  able  to  evade  the  dictates  of  their  conscience  by 
any  means  whatever;  their  actions  will  be  guided  by  it  alone.  They 
will  be  without  cowardice,  and  will  not  default  from  that  which 
they  regard  as  due.  They  will  never  be  irresponsible  executors 
of  someone  else's  will,  because  they  will  possess  a  will  of  their  own. 
From  themselves  they  will  demand  first  of  all  a  clear  knowledge 
of  what  they  are  doing  and  why.  Furthermore  they  will  feel  their 
responsibility  to  the  very  end  toward  everyone  whom  their  activity 
affects. 

It  will  be  truly  a  higher  race — and  there  will  be  no  possibility 
of  any  falsification,  any  substitution,  or  any  usurpation  at  all.  It 
will  be  impossible  for  anything  to  be  bought,  or  appropriated  to  oneself 
by  deceit  or  by  might.    Not  only  will  this  race  be,  but  it  already  is. 


332  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

The  men  of  the  new  race  begin  already  to  know  one  another: 
already  are  established  pass-words  and  countersigns.  And  per- 
haps those  social  and  political  questions  so  sharply  put  forward 
in  our  time  may  be  solved  on  quite  another  plane  and  by  quite 
a  different  method  than  we  think — may  be  solved  by  the  entrance 
into  the  arena  of  a  new  race  conscious  of  itself  which  will  judge 
the  old  races.  

In  my  remarks  I  called  attention  to  certain  imperfections  in 
Dr.  Bucke's  book  arising  chiefly  from  a  strange  indecisiveness  of 
his,  from  his  timidity  in  asserting  the  dominant  significance  of  the 
new  consciousness.  This  results  from  the  desire  of  Dr.  Bucke 
to  establish  the  future  of  humanity  from  a  positivistic  standpoint 
upon  social  and  political  revolutions.  But  we  may  regard  this 
view  as  having  lost  all  validity.  The  bankruptcy  of  materialism 
when  it  comes  to  organizing  life  on  earth  is  now  evident  in  the 
bloody  epoch  which  we  are  undergoing,  even  to  those  men  who 
but  yesterday  were  prating  of  "culture"  and  civilization."  It 
becomes  clearer  and  clearer  that  the  changes  in  our  outer  life, 
when  they  come,  will  come  as  a  result  of  inner  changes  in  man, 
and  as  a  result  of  the  consciousness  in  him  of  those  faculties  and 
aspects  of  his  own  being  of  which  he  was  unconscious,  which  he 
did  not  recognize  before,  and  without  which  he  thought  it  possible 
to  get  along. 

We  may  say  further  with  regard  to  Dr.  Bucke's  entire  book, 
that  touching  the  idea  of  the  natural  growth  of  consciousness,  he 
does  not  notice  this:  namely,  that  perhaps  the  whole  thing  con- 
sists not  in  the  growth,  but  in  the  development,  or  lack  of  de- 
velopment, of  already  existing  faculties.  These  faculties  do  not 
unfold  themselves  perforce:  conscious  work  on  them  is  necessary. 
Moreover,  even  if  the  idea  of  growth  be  admitted,  Dr.  Bucke 
fails  to  note  those  changes  which  must  be  brought  about  in  the 
natural  process  by  reason  of  the  appearance  of  self -consciousness. 
And  he  does  not  dwell  at  all  on  conscious  efforts  in  this  direction, 
on  the  idea  of  the  culture  of  cosmic  consciousness.  Meanwhile 
there  exists  a  whole  series  of  psychological  teachings  (occultism, 
yoga,  etc.)  and  a  large  literature  having  in  view  a  systematic 
culture  of  the  higher  consciousness.  Dr.  Bucke  does  not  remark 
this,  and  insists  upon  the  idea  of  natural  growth,  although  he 
himself  several  times  touches  upon  the  culture  of  consciousness. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  333 

In  one  portion  of  his  book  he  speaks  very  contemptuously  regard- 
ing the  use  of  narcotics  for  the  creation  of  ecstatic  states,  not 
taking  into  consideration  the  fact  that  narcotics  cannot  give  any- 
thing which  man  does  not  possess  (this  is  the  explanation  of  the 
different  action  of  narcotics  on  different  men),  but  can  only  in 
certain  cases  unfold  that  which  is  already  in  the  soul  of  man. 
This  entirely  alters  the  point  of  view  upon  narcotics,  as  Prof. 
William  James  has  shown  in  his  book,  "The  Varieties  of  Religious 
Experience." 

In  general,  allured  by  the  evolutionary  point  of  view,  and  looking 
at  the  future,  Dr.  Bucke,  like  many  others,  does  not  pay  sufficient 
attention  to  the  present.  That  cosmic  consciousness  which  men 
may  discover  or  unfold  in  themselves  now  is  indeed  far  more  im- 
portant than  that  which  may  or  may  not  appear  in  other  men 
millenniums  hence. 

Regarded  from  different  standpoints  the  complex  forms  of  the 
manifestation  of  spirit,  and  analyzing  the  views  and  opinions  of 
various  authors,  we  are  always  confronted  with  what  seem  to 
be  consecutive  phases  or  consecutive  stages  of  the  unfoldment  of 
consciousness.  And  we  find  such  phases  or  stages  to  be  four  in 
number.  Further  consideration  of  the  living  world  known  to  us, 
from  the  lower  animal  organisms  up  to  the  highly  developed  body 
of  man,  reveals  the  simultaneous  existence  of  all  four  forms  of 
consciousness  to  which  all  other  aspects  of  the  inner  life  cor- 
respond: the  sense  of  space  and  time,  the  form  of  activity,  etc. 
Still  further  consideration  of  man  of  the  higher  type  reveals  the 
presence  of  all  the  four  forms  of  consciousness  which  are  in  living 
nature,  with  forms  corresponding  to  them.     (See  table,  p.  334). 

The  simultaneous  co-existence  of  all  four  forms  of  consciousness 
at  once,  both  in  nature  and  in  the  higher  type  of  man  makes  the 
exclusively  evolutionary  standpoint  seem  forced  and  arti- 
ficial. The  evolutionary  standpoint  (though  this  is  not  gener- 
ally realized)  is  often  made  the  means  of  escape  from  difficult 
problems,  and  from  hard  thinking.  Many  cases  present  them- 
selves which  may  be  explained  without  any  reference  to  "evolu- 
tion," but  by  linking  them  up  with  it  they  fall  more  readily  within 
the  limits  of  our  usual  concepts,  they  require  less  tension  of  mind, 
and  do  not  demand  the  revision  and  revaluation  of  established 
values.     Evolution — this  is  a  very  comfortable  idea:  therefore 


334 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM 


some  people  apply  the  evolutionary  theory  where  there  is  no 
necessity  for  it  whatever.  In  many  cases  this  is  a  compromise  of 
thought.  Not  understanding  the  existing  variety  of  forms,  and 
not  possessing  a  sufficiently  powerful  intellect  to  think  of  all  this  as 
a  unity,  men  have  recourse  to  the  evolutionary  idea,  and  regard 
this  great  variety  of  forms  as  an  ascending  ladder — not  because 
this  conforms  to  facts,  but  from  a  desire  to  systematize  at  all  costs, 
though  on  entirely  artificial  foundations.  It  appears  to  men 
that  having  built  a  system  they  already  know  something,  whereas 
in  reality  the  absence  of  a  system  is  often  much  nearer  to  real 
knowledge  than  an  artifical  system. 


Forms  of 
Consciousness. 

Living  World 

Man  of  Higher 
Type 

Latent 
Consciousness. 

Cells,  groups  of  cells, 
plants,  lower  ani- 
mals,  and   organs 
and  parts  of  body 
of  higher  animals 
and  of  man. 

Cells,       groups      of 
cells,    tissues    and 
organs  of  the  body 

Simple 
Consciousness 

Animals     possessing 
complex        organ- 
isms.    Absence  of 
consciousness      of 
death. 

Body,  instincts,   de- 
sires, voices  of  the 
body. 

Self 
Consciousness. 

Man  (herd  animal). 
Consciousness     of 
death. 

Simple        emotions. 
Logical        reason, 
mind. 

Cosmic 
Consciousness 

Man  of  higher  type 
(isolated  and  inde- 
pendent      being). 
Beginning   of   im- 
mortality. 

Higher   emotions, 
higher  intellect,  in- 
tuition,     mystical 
wisdom. 

TERTIUM   ORGANUM  335 

"Evolutionists,"  being  incapable  of  understanding  the  whole, 
without  representing  it  to  themselves  as  a  chain,  one  link  of 
which  is  connected  with  another,  are  like  the  blind  men  in  the 
Oriental  fable,  who  feel  of  an  elephant  in  different  places,  and  one 
affirms  that  the  elephant  is  like  pillars,  another  that  it  is  like  a 
thick  rope,  and  so  forth.  The  evolutionists  however,  add  to  this 
that  the  trunk  of  the  elephant  must  evolve  from  the  feet,  the  ears 
from  the  trunk,  and  so  on.  But  we  after  all  know  that  this  is  an 
elephant,  i.  е.,  a  single  being,  unknown  to  men  who  are  blind. 
Such  a  being  is  the  living  world.  And  with  regard  to  the  forms  of 
consciousness,  it  is  far  more  correct  to  consider  them  not  as  con- 
secutive phases  or  steps  of  evolution  which  are  separate  from  one 
another,  but  as  different  sides  or  parts  of  one  whole  which  we 
do  not  know. 

In  "man"  this  unity  is  apparent.  All  forms  of  consciousness 
in  him  are  equally  necessary ;  the  life  of  cells  and  organs,  with  their 
consciousnesses;  the  life  of  the  entire  body,  taken  as  a  whole;  the 
life  of  the  emotions  and  of  the  logical  reason,  and  the  life  of  the 
intuitions. 

The  higher  intuitive  form  of  consciousness  is  necessary  first  of 
all  for  life — for  the  organization  of  life  on  earth  as  we  are 
already  beginning  to  conceive  it.  Long  under  the  domination  of 
materialism  and  positive  thinking,  forgetting  and  perverting 
religious  ideas,  men  thought  that  it  was  possible  to  live  by  the 
merely  logical  mind  alone.  But  now,  little  by  little,  it  is  becoming 
quite  evident  to  those  who  have  eyes,  that  merely  by  the  exercise 
of  logical  reason  men  will  not  be  able  to  organize  their  life  on 
earth,  and  if  they  do  not  finally  exterminate  themselves,  as  the 
tribes  of  Polynesia  are  doing,  in  any  case  they  will  create  (and 
have  already  created)  impossible  conditions  of  life  in  which  every- 
thing gained  will  be  lost — i.  е.,  everything  that  was  given  them  in 
the  past  by  men  of  cosmic  consciousness. 


The  living  world  of  nature  (including  man)  is  analogous  to 
man;  and  it  is  more  correct  and  more  convenient  to  regard  the 
different  forms  of  consciousness  in  different  divisions  and  strata 
of  living  nature  as  belonging  to  one  organism  and  performing 
different,  but  related  functions,  than  as  separate,  and  evolving 
from  one  another.  Then  the  necessity  disappears  for  all  this 
naive  theorizing  on  the  subject  of  evolution.    We  do  not  regard 


336  TERTIUM  ORGANUM 

the  organs  and  members  of  the  body  of  man  as  evolved 
one  from  another  in  a  given  individual  and  we  should  not  be  guilty 
of  the  same  error  with  relation  to  the  organs  and  members  of  the 
body  of  living  nature. 

I  do  not  deny  the  law  of  evolution,  but  the  application  of  it  to  the 
explanation  of  many  phenomena  of  life  is  in  great  need  of  correction. 

Firstly,  if  we  accept  the  idea  of  one  common  evolution,  after  all 
it  is  necessary  to  remember  that  the  types  which  develop  slower, 
the  remnants  of  evolution,  may  not  continue  to  follow  after,  and 
at  a  slow  pace  the  same  evolution,  but  may  begin  an  evolution  of 
their  own,  developing  in  many  cases  exactly  those  properties  on 
account  of  which  they  were  thrown  out  from  basic  evolution. 

Secondly,  though  we  accept  the  law  of  evolution,  there  is  no 
necessity  to  regard  all  existing  forms  as  having  been  developed 
one  from  another  (like  man  from  the  ape,  for  example) .  In  such 
cases  it  is  more  correct  to  regard  them  all  as  the  highest  types  in 
their  own  evolution.  The  absence  of  intermediate  forms  makes 
this  view  much  more  probable  than  that  which  is  usually  ac- 
cepted, and  which  gives  such  rich  material  for  "  theosophical" 
discussions  about  the  obligatory  and  inevitable  perfection  of  all. 

The  views  propounded  here  are  indeed  more  difficult  than  the 
usual  evolutionary  point  of  view,  just  as  the  conception  of  the 
living  world  as  an  entire  organism  is  more  difficult;  but  this  diffi- 
culty must  be  surmounted.  I  have  said  already  that  the  real  world 
must  be  illogical  from  the  usual  point  of  view,  and  by  no  means 
can  it  be  made  simple  and  comprehensible  to  one  and  all.  The 
theory  of  evolution  is  in  need  of  many  corrections,  additions,  and 
much  development.  If  we  consider  the  existing  forms  on  any 
given  plane,  it  will  be  quite  impossible  to  declare  that  all  these 
forms  evolved  from  the  simplest  forms  on  this  plane.  Some  un- 
doubtedly evolved  from  the  lowest  ones;  others  resulted  from  the 
process  of  degeneration  of  the  higher  ones ;  a  third  class  developed 
from  the  remnants  of  some  evolved  form — while  a  fourth  class 
resulted  as  a  consequence  of  the  incursion  into  the  given  plane  of 
the  properties  and  characteristics  of  some  higher  plane.  It  is  cer- 
tainly impossible  to  regard  these  complex  forms  as  developed  by 
an  evolutionary  process  upon  the  given  plane. 

The  below  classification  will  show  more  clearly  this  correlation 
of  forms  of  manifestation  of  consciousness,  or  of  different  states  of 
consciousness. 


TERTIUM  ORGANUM  337 

First  form.  A  sense  of  one-dimensional  space.  Everything 
transpires  on  a  line,  as  it  were.  Sensations  are  not  differentiated. 
This  is  the  state  of  the  cell,  the  group  of  cells,  of  plants,  and  the 
tissues  and  organs  of  the  body  of  an  animal.  The  consciousness 
is  submerged  in  sleep,  as  it  were.  Confused  shadows  of  sensa- 
tions compel  it  weakly  and  unconsciously  to  react  to  outer  irrita- 
tions. Not  being  conscious  of  itself  it  feebly  goes  forth  toward 
heat,  toward  light,  toward  food. 

Second  form.  A  sense  of  two-dimensional  space.  This  is  the 
state  of  the  animal.  That  which  for  us  is  the  third  dimension,  for 
it  is  motion.  It  is  conscious  of  only  two  dimensions  simultane- 
ously. It  already  senses,  feels,  but  does  not  think.  Everything 
that  it  sees  appears  to  it  as  real.  For  it  the  world  is  full  of  non- 
existing,  illusory  motion. 

Third  form.  A  sense  of  three-dimensional  space.  Man  a  herd 
being.  Self-consciousness  and  logical  thinking.  Division  into 
I  and  Not-I.  Dogmatic  religions  or  dualistic  spiritism  and  neo- 
theosophy.  Codified  morality.  Division  into  spirit  and  matter, 
or  materialistic  monism.  Positivistic  science.  The  idea  of  evolu- 
tion. A  mechanical  universe.  The  understanding  of  cosmical 
ideas  as  metaphors.  "Historical  materialism,"  imperialism,  and 
so  forth.  Subjection  of  the  personality  to  society  and  law.  Com- 
plex and  conscious  actions  caused  by  instincts,  outer  impressions, 
or  images  of  perception  and  remembrance.  Conscious  auto- 
matism.   Death  as  the  extinction  of  the  personality. 

Fourth  form.  A  sense  of  four-dimensional  space.  A  new  sense 
of  time.  Intuition.  Cosmic  consciousness.  Mystical  sensation  of 
a  living  universe.  Reality  of  the  wondrous.  Sensation  of  infinity. 
Manifestation  of  the  "soul."  Individual  man  as  an  independent 
unit.  Morality  as  a  sensation  of  a  higher  world.  Man  as  a 
center  of  forces,  and  a  center  of  forthgoing  actions.  Possibility 
of  personal  immortality. 

Thus  the  third  form  includes  that  "man"  whom  positivistic 
science  studies;  but  the  fourth  form  is  characteristic  of  the  man 
who  has  already  passed  out  of  the  field  of  observation  of  posi- 
tivism. 

The  table  at  the  end  of  the  book  is  a  summing  up  of  the  con- 
tents of  the  entire  book  and  shows  more  in  detail  the  correlation 
of  the  observed  forms  of  consciousness  in  the  living  world  and  in 
"man." 


338  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

EVOLUTION  OR  CULTURE? 

The  most  interesting  and  important  question  arising  with 
regard  to  cosmic  consciousness  may  be  summed  up  as  follows: 
Is  the  manifestation  of  cosmic  consciousness  a  problem  of  the  distant 
future,  and  of  other  generations — i.  е.,  must  cosmic  consciousness 
appear  as  the  result  of  an  evolutionary  process,  after  centuries  and 
millenniums — or  can  it  make  its  appearance  now  in  contemporary 
man,  as  the  result  of  a  certain  education  and  self-development 
which  will  aid  the  unfolding  in  him  of  dominant  forces  and  capa- 
bilities, i.  е.,  as  the  result  of  a  certain  culture? 

It  seems  to  me  that  with  regard  to  this,  the  following  ideas  are 
tenable : 

On  earth  there  are  living  two  different  species  of  men.  The 
possibility  of  the  appearance  or  development  of  cosmic  conscious- 
ness is  the  distinguishing  mark  of  one  of  these  species — numer- 
ically small.  In  the  other,  infinitely  more  numerous,  cosmic  con- 
sciousness does  not  appear,  and  can  never  appear. 

But  even  in  the  case  of  those  men  in  whom  cosmic  conscious- 
ness may  appear,  certain  quite  definite  inner  and  outer  condi- 
tions are  requisite  for  its  manifestation — a  certain  culture,  the 
education  of  those  elements  congenial  to  cosmic  consciousness, 
and  the  elimination  of  those  hostile  to  it. 

In  other  words,  cosmic  consciousness  cannot  be  created  in  that 
man  in  whom  it  does  not  exist  in  embryo.  But  even  in  him  this 
embryo  may  be  developed  or  it  may  not  be  developed;  it  may  be 
choked  and  destroyed. 

The  distinguishing  marks  of  those  men  in  whom  cosmic  con- 
sciousness is  likely  to  manifest,  are  not  studied  at  all,  though  the 
idea  of  two  races  (in  somewhat  different  form)  has  been  in  exist- 
ence a  long  time.  This  idea  is  expressed  in  Christianity*  with 
greater  clearness  than  anywhere  else. 

The  first  of  these  signs  is  the  constant  or  frequent  sensation  that 
the  world  is  not  at  all  as  it  appears;  that  what  is  most  important 
in  it  is  not  at  all  what  is  considered  most  important.  The  quest 
of  the  wondrous,  sensed  as  the  only  real  and  true,  results  from 
this  impression  of  the  unreality  of  the  world  and  everything  re- 
lated thereto. 

Another  characteristic  sign  of  men  of  cosmic  consciousness  is  the 
absence  in  them  of  any  inner  division,  and  their  inability  to  think 

*The  Idea  of  Heaven  and  Hell — ("The  Wiadom  of  the  Gods"),  by  P.  D.  Ouspensky. 


TERTIUM   ORGANUM  339 

one  way  and  live  another.  Their  outer  and  inner  life  are  always 
connected,  and  the  outer  depends  upon  the  inner. 

High  mental  culture,  high  intellectual  attainments  are  not 
necessary  conditions  at  all.  The  example  of  many  saints,  who 
were  not  intellectual,  but  who  undoubtedly  attained  cosmic  con- 
sciousness, shows  that  cosmic  consciousness  may  develop  in  purely 
emotional  soil,  i.  е.,  in  the  given  case  as  a  result  of  religious  emo- 
tion. Cosmic  consciousness  is  also  possible  of  attainment  through 
the  emotion  attendant  upon  creation — in  painters,  musicians  and 
poets.  Art  in  its  highest  manifestations  is  a  path  to  cosmic  con- 
sciousness. Very  interesting  also  is  the  role  of  erotics  in  the  ap- 
pearance and  development  of  cosmic  consciousness. 

But  equally  in  all  cases  the  unfoldment  of  cosmic  consciousness 
demands  a  certain  culture,  a  correspondent  life.  From  all  the 
examples  cited  by  Dr.  Bucke,  and  all  others  that  one  might  add, 
it  would  not  be  possible  to  select  a  single  case  in  which  cosmic 
consciousness  unfolded  in  conditions  of  inner  life  adverse  to  it, 
i.  е.,  in  moments  of  absorption  by  the  outer  life,  with  its  struggles, 
its  emotions  and  interests. 

For  the  manifestation  of  cosmic  consciousness  it  is  necessary 
that  the  center  of  gravity  of  everything  shall  lie  for  man  in  the 
inner  world  and  not  in  the  outer.  And  because  conditions  of  life 
may  exist  which  definitely  interfere  with  the  transfer  of  the 
center  of  gravity  of  man's  interests  to  the  inner  world,  con- 
sequently such  conditions  as  shall  not  interfere  with  it  are 
necessary. 

If  we  assume  that  Dr.  Bucke  himself  had  been  surrounded  by 
entirely  different  conditions  than  those  in  which  he  found  himself 
at  the  moment  of  experiencing  cosmic  consciousness,  then  in  all 
probability  his  illumination  would  not  have  come  at  all. 

He  spent  the  evening  reading  poetry  in  the  company  of  men  of 
high  intellectual  and  emotional  development,  and  was  returning 
home  full  of  the  thoughts  and  emotions  of  the  evening. 

But  if  instead  of  this  he  had  spent  the  evening  playing  cards  in 
the  society  of  men  whose  interests  were  common  and  whose  con- 
versation was  vulgar,  or  at  a  political  meeting,  or  had  he  worked  a 
night  shift  in  a  factory  at  a  turning  lathe  or  written  a  newspaper 
editorial  in  which  he  himself  did  not  believe  and  nobody  else 
would  believe — then  we  may  declare  with  certainty  that  no  cosmic 
consciousness  would  have  appeared  in  him  at  all.    For  it  undoubt- 


340  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

edly  demands  a  certain  attunement,  great  freedom,  and  concentra- 
tion on  the  inner  world. 

This  conclusion  in  regard  to  the  necessity  for  special  culture  and 
definitely  favorable  inner  and  outer  conditions  does  not  necessar- 
ily mean  that  cosmic  consciousness  is  likely  to  manifest  in  every 
man  who  is  put  in  these  conditions.  There  are  men,  probably  an 
enormous  majority  of  contemporary  humanity,  in  whom  exists 
no  such  possibility  at  all.  And  in  those  who  do  not  possess  it  in 
some  sort  already,  it  cannot  be  created  by  any  culture  whatever, 
in  the  same  way  that  no  kind  or  amount  of  culture  will  make  an 
animal  speak  the  language  of  man.  The  possibility  of  the  mani- 
festation of  cosmic  consciousness  cannot  be  inoculated  artificially. 
A  man  is  either  born  with  it  or  without  it.  This  possibility  can  be 
throttled  or  developed,  but  it  cannot  be  created.  And  when  it 
appears  it  indicates  that  a  given  man  belongs  to  a  special  race, 
living  in  the  midst  of  a  humanity  to  which  en  masse  this  property 
is  denied. 

Unaware  that  they  possess  this  "gift  of  the  gods,"  or  not  know- 
ing how  to  utilize  it,  men  of  this  higher  type  often  lose  it,  sinking 
into  the  material  world  with  its  interests  and  worries,  and  begin- 
ning to  believe  in  the  reality  of  this  world,  in  the  reality  of  illusion 
or  Maya. 

Not  all  can  learn  to  discern  the  real  from  the  false;  but  he  who 
can  will  not  receive  this  gift  of  discernment  free.  This  is  a  thing 
of  labor,  a  thing  of  great  work,  which  demands  boldness  of  thought 
and  boldness  of  feeling. 

In  the  book  "The  Wisdom  of  the  Gods"  I  hope  to  describe  the 
paths  by  which  men  have  gone  and  are  going  to  this  goal. 


CONCLUSION 

In  conclusion  I  wish  to  speak  of  those  wonderful  words,  full  of 
profound  mystery  from  the  Apocalypse  and  the  apostle  Paul's 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  which  are  placed  as  the  epigraph  of 
this  book. 

The  Apocalyptic  angel  swears  that    there  shall  be  time  no 

LONGER. 

We  know  not  what  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse  wanted  to 
convey,  but  we  do  know  those  states  of  spirit  when  time  dis- 
appears. We  know  that  in  this  very  thing,  in  the  change  of  the 
time  sense,  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  form  of  consciousness  is 
expressed,  the  beginning  of  the  transition  to  cosmic  conscious- 
ness. 

In  this  and  in  phrases  similar  to  it,  the  profound  philosophical 
content  of  the  evangelical  teaching  sometimes  flashes  forth.  And 
the  understanding  of  the  fact  that  the  mystery  of  time  is  the 
first  mystery  to  be  revealed  is  the  first  step  toward  the  develop- 
ment of  cosmic  consciousness  along  the  intellectual  path. 

But  what  did  the  Apocalyptic  sentence  mean?  Did  it  mean 
precisely  what  we  are  now  able  to  construe  in  it — or  was  it  simply 
a  bit  of  verbal  art,  a  rhetorical  figure  of  speech,  the  accidental 
harping  of  a  string  which  has  continued  to  sound  up  to  our  own 
time,  through  centuries  and  millenniums,  with  such  a  wonderfully 
powerful,  true  and  beautiful  tone  of  thought?  We  know  not  now, 
nor  shall  we  ever:  but  the  words  are  full  of  splendor,  and  we  may 
accept  them  as  a  symbol  of  remote  and  inaccessible  truth. 

The  apostle  Paul's  words  are  even  more  strange,  even  more 
startling  by  reason  of  their  mathematical  exactness.  (A  friend 
showed  me  these  words  in  A.  Dubroluboff's  "From  the  Book  In- 
visible," who  saw  in  them  a  direct  reference  to  "the  fourth 
measure  of  space." 

Truly,  what  does  this  mean? 

.  .  .  That  ye,  being  rooted  and  grounded  in  love,  may  be  able  to 
comprehend  with  all  saints  what  is  the  breadth  and  length  and  depth 
and  height. 

341 


342  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

First  of  all,  what  does  the  comprehension  of  breadth  and  length 
and  depth  and  height  mean?  What  is  it  but  the  comprehension  of 
space?  And  we  now  know  that  the  comprehension  of  the  mys- 
teries of  space  is  the  beginning  of  the  higher  comprehension. 

The  apostle  says  that  "being  rooted  and  grounded  in  love,  with 
all  the  saints"  they  may  comprehend  what  space  is. 

Here  arises  the  question:  why  must  love  give  comprehension? 
That  love  leads  to  sanctity — this  is  easily  understood.  Love  in 
the  sense  that  the  apostle  Paul  understands  it  (Chapter  XIII.  of 
the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians)  is  the  highest  of  all  emotions, 
the  synthesis,  the  blending  of  all  highest  emotions.  Incontestably, 
this  leads  to  sanctity.  Sanctity:  this  is  the  state  of  the  spirit 
liberated  from  the  duality  of  man,  from  his  eternal  disharmony  of 
soul  and  body.  In  the  language  of  the  apostle  Paul  sanctity  meant 
even  a  little  less  than  in  our  contemporary  language.  He  called 
all  members  of  his  church  saints;  sancity  meant  to  him  righteous- 
ness, morality,  religiosity.  We  say  that  all  this  is  merely  the  path 
to  sanctity.  Sanctity  is  something  more — something  attained. 
But  it  is  after  all  immaterial  how  we  shall  understand  his  words — 
in  his  meaning  or  in  ours — sanctity  is  a  superhuman  quality.  In 
the  region  of  morality  it  corresponds  to  genius  in  the  region  of 
mind.    Love  is  the  path  to  sainthood. 

But  with  sanctity  the  apostle  Paul  unites  knowledge. 
Saints  comprehend  what  is  the  breadth  and  length  and  depth  and 
height;  and  he  says  that  all — through  love — may  comprehend  this 
with  them.  But  may  comprehend  what,  exactly?  Comprehend 
space.  Because  "  breadth  and  length  and  depth  and  height"  trans- 
lated into  our  language  of  shorter  definitions  actually  means  space. 

This  last  is  the  most  strange. 

How  could  the  apostle  Paul  know  and  think  that  sanctity  gives 
a  new  understanding  of  space?  We  know  that  it  must  give  it,  but 
from  what  could  he  know  that? 

None  of  his  contemporaries  ever  united  sanctity  with  the  idea 
of  the  comprehension  of  space;  and  in  general  there  was  no  dis- 
cussion at  all  about  "space"  at  that  time,  at  least  among  the 
Greeks  and  Romans.  Only  now,  after  Kant,  and  after  we  have  had 
access  to  the  treasures  of  thought  of  the  Orient,  do  we  understand 
that  the  transition  into  a  new  phase  of  consciousness  is  impossible 
without  the  expansion  of  the  space  sense. 

But  we  wonder  if  this  is  what  the  apostle  Paul  wanted  to  say — 


TEETIUM  ORGANUM  S4S 

that  strange  man :  Roman  official,  persecutor  of  the  first  Christian- 
t  who  became  its  preacher,  philosopher,  j^*™  ^o 
"saw  God,"  the  bold  reformer  and  moralist  of  his  time,  who 
foujht  for  "the  spirit"  against  "the  letter"  and  was  of  course  not 
respons  Ь  e  for  the  fact  that  he  himself  was  understood  by  others 
not  L"  the  spirit,"  but  in  "the  letter."  Is  it  tbs  that  he  wanted 
to  sav?    We  do  not  know.  ,    , 

But  let  us  look  at  these  words  of  the  Apocalypse jn&  the 
EpUs  from  the  standpoint  of  our  usual  '>» :  thidong 
which  sometimes  condescendingly  agrees  to  admit  the     meta 
phorical  meaning"  of  mysticism.    What  shall  we  see? 

We  shall  see  nothing!  ....  •  .,.„„♦    „;n 

The  flash  of  mystery,  which  appeared  just  for  an  instant   w.  1 
immediately  disappear.    The  words  will  be  without  any  content 
uoXng In  them  will  attract  onr  wearied  attention,  which  will 
merely  glide  over  them  as  it  glides  over  everything.    We  will  in- 
differently turn  the  page  and  indifferently  close  the  book. 
An  interesting  metaphor,  yes:    But  nothing  else! 
And  we  fail  to  observe  that  we  rob  ourselves,  deprive  life  of 
all  beauly,  all  mystery,  all  contents;  and  wonder  afterwards  why 
everythmg  is  so  uninteresting  and  detestable  to  us    why  we  do 
uot  desireto  live,  and  why  we  do  not  understand  «Д»^ 
us-  we  wonder  why  brute  force  wins,  or  deceit  and  falsification, 
though  to  these  things  we  have  nothing  to  oppose. 

The  method  is  no  good.  .  . 

In  its  time  "positivism"   appeared  as  something  refreshing 
sober,  healthy  and  progressive,  which  explored  new  avenues  of 

thAfter'the  sentimental  speculations  of  naive  dualism  "positiv- 
ism" was  indeed  a  great  step  forward.  Positivism  became  a  sym- 
bol of  the  progress  of  thought.  ,  . 

But  we  see  now  that  it  inevitably  leads  to  matenahsm.  And  in 
this  form  it  arrests  thought,  which  a  long  time  ago  it  bound  within 
the  narrow  limits  of  matter  and  motion.  Г™™™^™*'?^ 
secuted,  anarchistic  free-thinking,  positivism  became  the  bass  ol 
official  science.  It  is  decked-out  in  full  dress.  It  is  given  medab. 
There  are  academies  and  universities  dedicated  to  its  service.  It 
is  recognized.    It  teaches.    It  tyrannizes  over  thought. 

But  having  attained  to  well-being  and  prosperity,  P°ftivism 
immediately  opposed  obstacles  to  the  forward  march  of  thought. 


344  TERTIUM   ORGANUM 

Everything  transcending  the  scheme  of  energetics  is  declared  to  be 
superstition.  Everything  transcending  the  limits  of  ordinary  con- 
sciousness is  declared  to  be  pathological.  A  Chinese  wall  of  "posi- 
tivistic"  sciences  and  methods  is  built  up  around  free  investiga- 
tion. Everything  rising  above  this  wall  is  condemned  as  un- 
scientific. 

And  seen  in  this  way  positivism,  which  before  was  a  symbol  of 
progress,  now  appears  as  conservative,  reactionary. 

The  existing  order  is  already  established  in  the  world  of  thought, 
and  to  fight  against  it  is  declared  to  be  a  crime. 

With  astonishing  rapidity  those  principles  which  only  yester- 
day expressed  the  highest  radicalism  in  the  region  of  thought  have 
become  the  basis  of  opportunism  in  the  region  of  ideas  and  serve 
as  blind  alleys,  stopping  the  progress  of  thought.  In  our  eyes  this 
occurred  with  the  idea  of  evolution,  on  which  it  is  now  possible  to 
build  up  anything,  and  with  the  help  of  which  it  is  possible  to 
tear  down  anything. 

The  idea  of  evolution  brings  together  "positivism"  and  "the- 
osophy." 

Theosophy  is  passing  along  the  same  path  that  many  move- 
ments of  thought  have  passed  before.  Beginning  with  a  bold, 
revolutionary  search  for  the  wondrous,  theosophy  soon  started  to 
fall  away  from  that  and  to  stop  at  some  "found"  truths  which  are 
gradually  converted  into  indisputable  dogmas. 

But  thought,  which  is  free,  cannot  be  bound  by  any  limits. 
No  one  method,  no  one  system,  can  ever  satisfy  it  at  all.  It  must 
take  from  all  that  which  is  precious  in  them.  It  must  regard 
nothing  as  solved,  and  nothing  as  impossible. 

The  true  motion  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  everything,  is 
motion  of  thought.  True  energy — this  is  the  energy  of  consciousness. 
And  truth  itself  is  motion,  and  can  never  lead  to  arrestment,  to 
the  cessation  of  search. 

All  that  arrests  the  motion  of  thought — is  false. 

Therefore  the  true  and  real  progress  of  thought  is  only  in  the 
broadest  striving  toward  knowledge,  that  does  not  recognize  the 
possibility  of  arrestment  in  any  found  forms  at  all.  The  meaning 
of  life  is  in  eternal  search.  And  only  in  that  search  can  we  find 
something  truly  new. 


EST/ 


(like  the 
H.    The 


Й 


lorals  in 
ad  tribal 


£ 


by  in- 
ilw  of  the 
"pis  a  con- 
The  un- 
to   the 
scies. 


)od  and 
Is.  At- 
aner  law 
ured  un- 
and  of 
Con- 
ility  for 
^f  actions 

Jpn  only. 

-Г  risibility 
'institu- 
my  duty 
im  not 
m  to  the 
the  fam- 
tribe,  of 


w  inside 
nscience. 
:  evasion 
f  respon- 
:sults  of 
possibil- 
will  of 
>nscious- 
4  without 
-py.  The 
position 
nsibility 
fficiency 
law  and 
эп  from 
шр-con- 
ation  of 
;nt  unit. 


TABLE  OF  THE  FOUR  FORMS  OF  THE  MANIFESTATION  OF  CONSCIOUSNESS 


The  Sence  op  Space 
and  Time 

PsTCHOLOQT 

u- 

Mathematics 

Forms  of  Actions 

Morals 

Forms  of  Consciousness 

Forms  or  Knowledge 

*—- — 

Different  Beings 

The  sense  of  one-dimen- 

Appearance  of   the   first 

The  absence  of  thinking 

The  absence  of  numera- 

Reflex,   unconscious,    re- 

Unconscious actions  (like  tin- 

Potential    consciousness. 

Unconscious     receptivity 

An       accumulation       of 

The  low         "1С 

sional  space.    The  world  on 

sensation.   Sensation  a  unit. 

or  a  confused  thinking  of  the 

sponsive  action  to  external 

actions  of  a  man  asleep).     The 

Consciousness   in   a   latent 

of  the  environment,  and  un- 

"traces"  from  the  produced 

of  the  tissues  and  organs  of 
the  body.    The  one-dimen- 

1ST 

the  line.    The  line  аз  фасе. 

Its  division  into  two.    The 

2nd  form. 

tion  of  the  2nd  form. 

absence  of  morals. 

state — asleep.       Conscious- 

i onsuous  reaction  to  it. 

reflexes.    The  appearance  of 

Form 

everything    else    as    time. 

gradual  evolution  of  sensa- 

ness  as   in   sleep   without 

instinct  and  the  accumula- 

sional being.     Vegetative  or 
scmi-vtgetatite  life. 

Everything  except  one  im- 

tions and  the  accumulation 

dreams. 

tion  of  simple  instincts. 

mobile  line  is  in  motion. 

of    remembrances  concern- 

The  sense  ot  two-dimen- 

Perception.    The  expres- 

This  is  this. 

The  comparison  of  sepa- 

Instinct.       "  Emotional" 

The  beginnings  of  morals  in 

Simple  consciousness. 

The  beginnings  of  atten- 

Personal knowledge.   Im- 

The higher  animal.    The 
body   of   man.     The   two- 

sional  space.    The  world  on 

That  is  that. 

rate  visible  objects  or  sepa- 

and expedient  action  with- 

the maternal,  family,  and  tribal 

"It  pains  me"  but  the  im- 

tion.     Observation.      The 

potence  to  communicate  ex- 

the  plane.     The  plane  as 

sounds,  motions.     The  ab- 

This is  not  that. 

rate  perceptions. 

out  consciousness  of  results. 

instincts. 

possibility  of  saying,  "I  am 

beginnings    of    activity    in 

perience.    The  beginnings  of 

dimensional  being.    The  ab- 
sence of  duality,  divisibility 
and   disharmony.     Animal 

space,    everything   else    as 

sence  of  words  and  speech. 

The  bfginnings  of  logic. 

The   direct   sensation   of 

Seeming  consciousness. 

An  inner  law  directed  by  in- 

conscious of  what  it  is  that 

knowledge.    The  accumula- 

the communication   of   ex- 

2nd 

time.    Angles  and  curves  as 

Were  there  speech  it  would 

The  logic  of  the  unique- 

quantity.           Computation 

stincts.    Morals  as  a  law  of  the 

pains    me."    The   reflected 

tion  of  instincts.  The  recog- 

perience in  the  training  of 

Form 

motions.    A  world  of  mov- 

consist of  substantives  only. 

ness  of  each  separate  thing. 

within  the  limits  of  this  sen- 

life  of  the  species  and  as  a  con- 

state of  consciousness.  Vis- 

nition of  everything  sensed 

the  young. 

life. 

ing  planes. 

dition  of  evolution.     The  un- 

ion as  in  dreams.    The  con- 

as real     The  failure  to  dis- 

conscious   submission    to    the 

fusion  of  the  I  and  the  Not- 

criminate      between      that 

"group  soul"  of  the  species. 

I.     The    passive   state   of 

which  is  illusory  and  that 
which  is  real. 

The  sense  of  three-dimen- 

Concept. 

A  is  A. 

Every  magnitude  is  equal 

The  consciousness  of  ac- 

The division  into  good  and 

Self-consciousness.      The 

Experience.     Experimen- 

Positive   science.      Posi- 

Man.        A  three-dimen- 

sional space.    The  world  in 

Words. 

А  Ь  not-A. 

to  itself.     The  part  is  less 

tions  performed  for  a  defi- 

evil.     Dualistic    morals.      At- 

ability   to    think   of  one's 

tal  knowledge.    Activity  of 

tive  philosophy.     Material- 

sional being  outwardly  and 

Judgment. 

Everything  is  either  A  or 

than  the  whole,  etc. 

nite   purpose.      The    possi- 

tempts to  replace  the  inner  law 

states     of       consciousness. 

the     objective     knowledge 

ism,    Spiritualist ie  philoso- 

dual inn-ardhj.     Inner  war- 

sphere as  space.   Everything 

Syllogism. 

Finite  and  constant  num- 

bility of  a  consciousness  of 

by  tin-outer  one.    Obscured  un- 

Waking, or  clear  conscious- 

under the  conditions  of  the 

phy.    Dogmatic  theosophy. 

fare.     The  impossibility  of 

else  as  time.    Phenomena  as 

Reasoning. 

Dualistic  logic. 

bers.      The    geometry    of 

results.  Thecauseof  actions 

derstanding  of  morals  and  of 

ness.    The  division  of  I  and 

given  subjective  one.     The 

Spiritism    and     pseudo-oc- 

attaining   inner    harmony. 

motions.       Life    a    feeling 

Speech. 

A  logic  of  antitheses. 

Euclid. 

intheouterworld  in  impres- 

(lie   /'iir/iose   of  morals.      Con- 

Not-I.     Active    conscious- 

development   of    objective 

cultism.             Sectarianism. 

The  "soul"   as  the  battle- 

one's way.     Non-existence 

Written  language. 

sions  received  from  the  outer 

sciousness  of  responsibility  f...r 

ness.    Consciousness  able  to 

knowledge  up  to  the  limits 

Dualism.         Matter      and 

field  of  the  "spirit"  and  the 

3rd 

of  the  "past"   and  of  the 

Allegory. 

world.      The    impossibility 

the  immediate  results  of  actions 

think  about  itself  and  about 

possible  to  it.    The  study  of 

spirit.     The  sense  of  a  dead 

"flesh."     The  kingdom  of 

"future".  A  becoming  uni- 

of  independent  actions  with- 

only, and  in  one  relation  only 

its  development. 

phenomena.     The  recogni- 

and   mechanical    universe. 

the       personal.     Conscious 

Form 

out  impulses  coming  from 

The  imposition  of  responsibility 

The  moment  when  further 

tion  of  the  reality  of   the 

Emotional  art.    Separation 

automatism.    The  absence 

the  outside. 

upon  others,  or  upon  "institu- 
tions." "I  am  fulfilling  my  duty 
or  the  law  aud  I  am  not 
guilty."  The  submission  to  the 
group  consciousness  of  the  fam- 
ily, of  the  clan,  of  the  tribe,  of 
the  nation,  of  humanity. 

evolution    can    be    conscious 

phenomenal,  objective  end 
finite  only — or  contrariwise 
— the  affirmation  of  con- 
structed sciences  founded 
upon  authorities. 

of  different  forms  of  science. 

of  persona]  immortality. 

The  sense  of  four-dimen- 

Intuition. 

A  is  both  A  and  not-A. 

A  magnitude  can  be  not 

The  certain  consciousness 

The  return  to  the  law  insid<- 

The  appearance  of  cosmic 

The  beginning  of  the  de- 

Idealistic philosophy. 

The    beginnings    of    the 

sional  space.    The  sensation 

Direct  communion  of  con- 

Tat  tuam  asi.     Thou  art 

equal   to  itself.     The  part 

of  the  results  of  action,  and 

consciousness.        Beginning 

velopment     of     subjective 

Mathematics  of  the  infinite. 

transition  to  a  new  type  and 

of  the  past  and  the  future  as 

that. 

can  be  equal  to  the  whole, 

one's  participation  in  them. 

The  impossibility  of  the  evasion 

of    the    sensation    of    con- 

knowledge. Intuition.  Mys- 

Tertium   Organum.     Intui- 

a new  sensation  of  space. 

the  present. 

Direct  knowledge. 

"Tertium  Organum." 

The    inevitable    conscious- 

of  morals.    The  sense  of  respon- 

sciousness in  all  and  the  con- 

tic knowledge.    A  new  sen- 

tive art.    Mystical  religion. 

"  Men    of    cosmical    con- 

Spatial sensation  of  time. 

Symbolism. 

Logic  of  the  unity  of  all. 

Transfinite  numbers. 

sibility   for   all   the   results   of 

sciousness  of  All.    The  ap- 

sation of  time.  Beginning  of 

(lod  and  the  cosmos — one. 

sciousness."    Victory  of  the 

Existence  of  the  past  and 

Infinite  and  variable  mag- 

of  one's  actions.    The  start- 

one's actions.     The  inipuM-ilnl- 

proach     to    absolute    con- 

the   knowledge    of    causes. 

Monism.    One  spirit.    The 

spirit.    Spiritual  life.    Tri- 

future   together    with    the 

ing  of  actions  with  the  un- 

ity  of  executing   the  will   of 

sciousness.     Samadhi.     Ex- 

Beginning  of  the  knowledge 

sensation   of  a  living  and 

umph  of  the  super-personal 

present.      A    universe    in 

M  e  tageom  e  t  ry . 

derstanding    of    their    co5- 

another,  without  the  conscious- 

tasy.    Turiya.        Holiness. 

of  the  Not-I  as  the  I.    The 

principle.     The  attainment 

4th 

which  the  past  and  the  fu- 

mical   meaning    and    pur- 

ness of  its  purpose  and  u  it  hunt. 

Union  with  the  One.     Ab- 

sensation of  infinity.     The 

teric    masonry.      Mystical 

of  inner  unitvand  harmony. 

Form 

ture  exist  simultaneously. 

poses.       Intuitive    actions. 

a  sense  of  responsibility.     The 

sorption  of  all  Not-I  in  the 

sensation  of   the   unreality 

theosophy.     The  union  of 

The  soul  as  the  center  of  in- 

The commencement  of  in- 

impossibility of  the  imposition 

I.     "The  ocean  flows  into 

of  the  phenomenal,  visible 

all  sciences  into  one  in  the 

dependent  actions.  The  be- 

dependent actions  proceed- 

upon another  of  responsibility 

the  drop."     Possibility   of 

world.     The  recognition  of 

higher       esotericism.    Oc- 

ginnings of  personal  immor- 

ing from  oneself. 

for  one's  actions.    Insum'i  ioncy 

the   manifestation   of   con- 

the  reality  of   the   infinite 

cultism. 

tality. 

Magic. 

of  the  fulfillment  of  the  law  and 
of  duty.  Emancipation  from 
submission  to  the  group-con- 
sciousness. The  realization  of 
oneself  as  an  independent  unit. 

sciousness  independently  of 
time  and  distance.     Clair- 
voyance. 

only  a  knowledge  of  the 
hidden  substance  of  things 
by  their  outer  signs.  Un- 
foldment  of  the  "world  of 

the  wondrous." 

r 


A     000  029  898     4 


